- (1.) IN this appeal, the appellant writ petitioner has made twin prayers, one for the clearance from the Government of Jharkhand for his being sent on deputation with the Central Government, and second with respect to the Vigilance case stated to be pending in Bihar. In so far as the first prayer of the appellant is concerned, we have no hesitation in granting the same, in the sense that the appellant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority of the Government of Jharkhand with respect to his aforesaid request for grant of clearance for Central deputation. If such a request is made by the appellant, or if the appellant approaches such an appropriate authority, the authority is directed to consider such a request on its merits and in accordance with law, rules and regulations. Of course, it goes without saying that the request for Central deputation is always dependent upon the orders passed in this behalf by the appropriate Authorities in the State Government as well as in the Central Government.
(2.) INSOFAR as the second prayer, the main prayer of the appellant is concerned, we have to refer to the order dated 20th April, 2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWJC No, 1573/2001 whereby the appellants writ application for quashing the notice dated 7th April, 2001 was dismissed. In the aforesaid order dated 20th April, 2001, a reference was made to an earlier order passed on 29th November 1999 by a learned Single Judge of Patna High Court in MJC No. 1498/98. The operative part of that order read thus : - - "In the facts and circumstances, instead of proceeding against the opposite parties, I allow them further time to conclude the vigilance enquiry and to pass final order thereof within eight months from today, on failure, the said proceeding will stand quashed on the ground of non -compliance of the Courts order. However, it will be open to the appropriate authority to ask for more time, on genuine ground. The appearance of Mr. Arvind Prasad, Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department and Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Vigilance Commissioner are dispensed with. The MJC application stands disposed of." It is contended by the appellant that because of the aforesaid order, the enquiry initiated against the petitioner appellant Should be considered to have now been quashed because admittedly within the time granted by that order, neither the enquiry was completed nor any final order passed. In reply, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 to 9 submits that much before the period granted by the aforesaid Order had actually expired, these respondents had filed applications in Patna High Court for extension of the said period. But orders on such applications could not be passed by Patna High Court because these have so far not been listed in the Court. The learned counsel for the appellant also submitted before us that a contempt application has been filed by the appellant also in Patna High Court and that is also pending disposal there.
(3.) ON a very careful, deep and thoughtful consideration, we find that, perhaps, we are being asked to travel in a forbidden territory in so far as the second prayer of the appellant is concerned. We are saying so because we are of the considered opinion that in so far as this request is concerned, the matter relates to a cause of action or an occurrence which is not within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The entire matter relates to Dinar State. The order dated 29th November 1999 in MJC No. 1498/98 was passed by Patna High Court at Patna. The allegations which constitute the subject matter of the Enquiry against the Appellant relate to an occurrence, which allegedly took place in Patna. No provision of law, nor any Section of the Bihar Re - organisation Act. 2000. was brought to our notice whereby we could have considered or held that the proceedings in any manner, in a case like the present one. shall be deemed to have been transferred to Jharkhand State. Because the matter relates to Patna. we refrain from interfering in any manner whatsoever in the matter. However, we do wish to observe that respondents 5 to 9 shall be at absolute liberty to approach the Honble Chief Justice of Honble Patna High Court, with a prayer for early listing of their aforesaid pending applications, that they say, they have filed for extension of time with respect to the Order dated 29.11.1999 (supra). Similarly, the appellant may also approach the Honble Chief Justice of Honble Patna High Court with a similar prayer with respect to his application as well.;