- (1.) HEARD Sri Srijit Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent State of Jharkhand and Sri S.P. Roy, learned counsel for the State of Bihar.
(2.) THE petitioner in this writ application, has prayed for quashing the portion of the order contained in letter no. 2221(s) dated 7.7.2004, issued by the Under Secretary, Road Construction Department, Jharkhand (Respondent no. 5), whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,41,710/ - as condition precedent to the grant of benefits consequent upon the acceptance of the petitioner's voluntary retirement with effect from 1.1.2003. The petitioner was appointed on 4.11.1965 on the post of Overseer (Junior Engineer) in the Public Works Department, Government of Bihar. After having served at various postings in the State of Bihar, he was transferred to the Road Construction Department, Ranchi, where he joined on 4.8.2000. However, for the period from 29.7.2000 to 14.11.2000, his salary was not paid to him. Subsequently, on his further transfer, he joined the office of the Executive Engineer, Soil Investigation Division, Road Construction Department, Advanced Planning, Ranchi (Jharkhand) on 28.6.2001 and during such posting, he submitted an application seeking voluntary retirement under Rule 74(b)(i) of the Bihar Service Code on 9.9.2002, before the Engineer -in -Chief, Road Construction Department, Ranchi, Jharkhand. He filed a similar application on 10.9.2002, seeking his voluntary retirement, before the Engineer -in - Chief -cum -Additional Commissioner -cum - Special Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Respondent no. 4).
(3.) WHEN no decision was communicated to him on his prayer for the grant of voluntary retirement, he filed a writ application before the Patna High Court vide CWJC No. 5152 of 2003. While disposing of the writ application by order dated 28.11.2003, Patna High Court had directed the respondent authorities to take a final decision on the petitioner's prayer for accepting his voluntary retirement. Upon the petitioner's preferring a contempt application when no final decision was taken within the period stipulated by the court, the respondent authorities of the State of Bihar had declared in their counter -affidavit that the decision on the petitioner's prayer for voluntary retirement, cannot be taken by them since after bifurcation, the petitioner was allocated Jharkhand Cadre and the petitioner's appointing authority being the authority in the State of Jharkhand, it is they who are to take decision on this issue.;