S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J. - (1.) IN this case, the petitioner has challenged notification No. 643, dated 7th February, 2004. By the said notification, services of the petitioners has been placed under Urban Development Department, Jharkhand for his placement as Executive Engineer, Mineral Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as MADA).
(2.) THE main plea taken on behalf of the petitioner is that deputation of petitioner in MADA amounts to transfer to Foreign Service, which cannot be done without the consent of the employee, as required under Rule 267(a) of Jharkhand Service Code. It is submitted that the respondents have not taken any consent from petitioner before deputation to Foreign Service. To determine the issue, it is necessary to notice Rule 267(a) of the Jharkhand Service Code, as quoted hereunder : "No Government servant may be transferred to foreign service without his consent : Provided that this sub -rule shall not apply to the transfer of, a Government servant to the service of a body incorporated or not which is wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the State Government, or by the Government of India, when the body operates or would operate in Bihar even though its head quarters may be outside the State."
(3.) IN this case, it has not been disputed that MADA is a body corporate and is wholly owned and controlled by the Government of Jharkhand. In the circumstances, as per proviso to Rule 267(a) of the Service Code, it was not necessary for the respondents to obtain consent from the petitioner. The competent authority has jurisdiction to place the services of petitioner under MADA.;