Arbind Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.

- constitution of india. articles 12 & 226: [m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j., narendra nath tiwari & d.p.singh, jj] writ petition - maintainability - whether state co-operative milk producers federation ltd., is a state within meaning of article 12 ? - held, from perusal of relevant rules of byelaws, it is clear that state government has no role to play either in policy decision for raising funds for federation or its expenditure and thus have no financial control. further there is nothing to indicate that government has any functional and administrative control over federation. state government has no role to play in matter of appointment of any of officials of federation including managing director. federation is totally independent in all respects and in no way subservient to state government in conduct of its business. federation in no way can be termed as agency of state government and does not come within meaning of article 12 of constitution. writ petitions against federation is not maintainable. - let it be very clearly understood that only role of the erstwhile state in such a situation is merely to pass on the information or the relevant material to the state of jharkhand and leaving the rest for the state of jharkhand to do......such a background, where the state is carved out of an existing state, the co-operation between the two states becomes meaningful. if, therefore, the state of bihar has, in its possession, any material against a government servant who, by virtue of section 74 of the act, is now in the service of the state of jharkhand and if the state of bihar thinks that such material warrants initiation of an action against such a person, it is open to the state of bihar to forward such material to the state of jharkhand for such action as it considered appropriate by the state of jharkhand. let it be very clearly understood that only role of the erstwhile state in such a situation is merely to pass on the information or the relevant material to the state of jharkhand and leaving the rest for the state of jharkhand to do. similar would be the case for the state of jharkhand if an employee is in a place in bihar and if the state of jharkhand has any material in its possession which may be required to be forwarded to the state of bihar for appropriate action against such an employee.2. in this view of the matter, relying on the decision of the division bench of the court in the case of state of bihar v. arvind vijay billing and anr. (supra), the order as contained in annexure-31 to the writ application passed on 31.7.2002 dismissing the petitioner from service is hereby quashed and the matter is being remitted to the secretary to the government, water resource department, government of jharkhand, to take a fresh decision in the matter in accordance with law.3. the state of bihar at its own or on the request of the state of jharkhand may forward such materials, which are in its possession against the petitioner for taking action against him and the state of jharkhand on receipt of such materials from the state of bihar may pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.4. with these.....