IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6271 of 2009 Kaushal Kishore Tiwari, son of Sanatan Prasad Tiwari, resident of Village-Kutubpur Dumri, P.S. Hajipur Town, District Vaishali at present posted as Junior Engineer, Design Division No.2, Water Resources Department, Bhagalpur. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India through the Director (S.R.), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension, Department of Personnel and Training, Govt. of India. 2. The State of Bihar. 3. The Secretary, Department of Home (Special), Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. Deputy Secretary, Department of Home (Special), Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5. Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 6. Addl. Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 7. Deputy Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 8. Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 9. Chief Engineer, Department of Water Resources, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur. 10. Executive Engineer, Design Division No.2, Water Resources Department, Bhagalpur. 11. State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Home (Special), Ranchi. 12. Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 13. Deputy Secretary Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Bihar, Ranchi. --------- Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner :- Mr. A.K. Thakur, Adv. For the State of Bihar :- Mr. Santosh Kr. Singh, SC-22 For Union of India :- Mr. Sudhir Singh, Asst. S.G. O.I. For the State of Jharkhand :- Mr. Dhruv Mukherjee, Adv. 2 19.5.2009 Heard Mr. A.K. Thakur, counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the Union of India as also counsel for the State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand. In this writ application, the grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the allotment of cadre pursuant to the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Bihar in terms of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000. It is the case of the petitioner that when he was placed under suspension in the year 1999 or was removed from service in the year 2001, his allocation of cadre was not made but then during pendency of his writ application assailing the order of punishment dated 13.2.2001, he was shown to have been allotted to State of Jharkhand. 2 Mr. A.K. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, taking a clue from this position that even when the petitioner was dismissed from service had been shown to have been allotted State of Jharkhand, would contend that now his services should be taken over by the State of Bihar and he should not be forced to join the State of Jharkhand. The allocation of cadre is one time exercise and that has already been completed in terms of the Guideline issued by the Government of India. The State Advisory Committee has also completed its assignment and now if any fresh problem like the one being faced by the petitioner would emerge, the same will have to be adjudicated by the nodal authority i.e. the Central Government in terms of Section 72 of the Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000. While the State of Bihar as against the State of Jharkhand may have its separate views with regard to the absorption of the services of the petitioner, the decision of the Central Government will be binding on both the States in terms of the Bihar Re- organization Act, 2000. That being so, this Court would direct the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation to the Director (SR), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension, Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India along with all necessary documents as also a copy of this order, whereafter, the competent authority of the Government of India will take a final decision with regard to the allocation of State of the petitioner within a period of four months. 3 It goes without saying that if the Government of India will call for any information from both the State Government of Bihar and Jharkhand, they would be obliged to furnish it within a period of fifteen days from the date of such direction given by the Government of India. Let it be made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and has just remitted the matter to the Government of India in terms of Section 72 of the Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000 to decide the matter of cadre bifurcation of the petitioner. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is finally disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)