IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.268 of 2011 Bharat Ratna Abhilasi Son of late Mathura Prasad Abhilasi, R/o Mohalla- Saidpur, P.O. Bankipur, P.S. Kadamkuan, Dist. Patna. ---Petitioner Versus 1. Bihar State Electricity Board through its Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 3. Rajya Pramarsdatry Samitee Electricity Board B/4, B.S.E. Board Colony, New Punaichak, Patna. 4. General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer Magadh Electric Supply Area, Gaya. 5. Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Gaya. 6. Director of Personnel, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. ---Respondents. ----------- 03 24.06.2011 Both sides present. Petitioner is an employee serving the Bihar State Electricity Board as Junior Electrical Engineers. He assails the final allocation of the cadre made by the Advisory committee, Electricity Board whereby the services of the petitioner was allocated to the Jharkhand Electricity Board. The aforesaid allocation was communicated to the petitioner by order contained in Annexure-1. The stand of the petitioner is that he has to superannuate in immediate near future. Two sets of counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondent. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4 to 6 a stand has been taken in para 11 that if any personnel/employee has any grievance with allocation of cadre the remedy is to file appeal before the Chairman Central Electricity Authority, Ministry of Power, Govt. of India, New Delhi. The aforesaid appeal was to be filed within a time frame. The petitioner did not avail the aforesaid remedy. The aforesaid time for filing appeal was extended but 2 the petitioner did not avail the opportunity. When the process of relieving employees of different cadre began in the light of final allocation few employees submitted their appeal petition(s) before the Board which was/were not entertained as continued entertainment of such appeal was bound to defeat the whole purpose of cadre division. It appears therefrom that the petitioner has already been released w.e.f. 31.12.2010. In that view of the matter, this Court declines to grant any relief to the petitioner. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed a representation before the authority of the Board and he may be permitted to pursue the said representation. The application stands disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to pursue his representation already filed before the authority concerned. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )