IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12274 of 2011 1. Jyoti Kumar Shrivastava S/O Late R.N. Prasad R/O Nandan Medical Hall, Hospital Road, P.S.- Mufassil, Distt.- Siwan------ ------------------------------------------------Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary Department of Co- Operatives, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Registrar Department Of Co-Operatives, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Principal Secretary Rural Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. Additional Secretary Rural Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 5. The District Magistrate Saharsa 6. The Deputy Development Commissioner Saharsa 7. The Director National Rural Employment Programme, District Rural Development Agency, Saharsa------Respondents ---------------------------------- 2 26.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Taking into consideration the ambit and the extent of intervention in the matter of repatriation and the right of an employee to remain under deputation, there cannot be an occasion for this Court to now interfere with annexure-12, when a decision has been notified by the State Government to repatriate the petitioner to his parent department. The apprehension expressed by learned counsel for the petitioner that bundle of facts and documents which have been created as a ground of repatriation may be used against the petitioner in future considerations or career may be hindered is unfounded as of today. But if something is held out against the petitioner by the authority on the same ground or material the Court will not shy away from examining the matter. With the above observation writ petition is disposed of but no interference in annexure-12 is required at this stage. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)