Judgment:
D.N. Patel, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been appointed on compassionate ground as Clerk in Registration Department of the Respondents-the State of Bihar on 16th November, 2006, and the petitioner wants mutual inter-State transfer and some body is ready from Bihar to come in Jharkhand and the petitioner, who was appointed, in the Jharkhand State, is ready to go in the State of Bihar and, therefore, the present petition has been preferred. The respondents have brushed aside the representation of the petitioner without any justifiable reasons.
2. I have heard learned Counsel for the respondents who has submitted that there is no legal vested rights in the petitioner to get this type of mutual inter-State transfer. It is also vehemently submitted by learned Counsel for the State of Jharkhand that the person who comes from the State of Bihar to flu State of Jharkhand shall have to loose his all seniority and no body knows whether that officer is ready and willing to loose all his seniority likewise, the petitioner will also loose his seniority and no body knows, that whether the State of Bihar is ready to accept the petitioner in absence of all these types of factual aspects and also in absence of any law, rules, regulations or policy for mutual inter-State transfer There is no legal vested rights in the petitioner and, therefore, there is no corresponding duty, vested in the respondents, as alleged by the petitioner and hence, this petition deserves to be dismissed.
3. Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition for the folk-wing facts and reasons:
(i) The petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground as Clerk in the Registration Department of respondents-State of Jharkhand with effect from 16th November, 2006.
(ii) The State of Jharkhand has been bifurcated, as per the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, with effect from 15th November, 2000. The petitioner was not serving in the erstwhile State of Bihar, but, he was appointed much, later after the bifurcation of the State of jharkhand.
(iii) It appears that the petitioner belongs to the State of Bihar and, therefore, the petitioner wants to go in the State of Bihar and is claiming mutua inter-State transfer with one Sri Mahadev Marandi, who is resident of the State of Jharkhand and working as Clerk in the Registration Department, Motihari, State of Bihar. These two persons have decided that they can mutually be transferred and, therefore, this petition has been preferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out any rule, policy, regulation, notification in then favour that such type of mutual inter-state trsnsfer is a legitimate right, vested in the petitioner or there is corresponding duty of the State of Jharkhand to transfer the petitioner.
(iv) It is also not clear with the petitioner that whether the person wants to go in the State of Jharkhand is ready and willing to loose his seniority, likewise, the petitioner has not stated in this petition that he is ready and willing to lose all his seniority with the State of Bihar likewise, it is not known to the petitioner whether he will be accepted by the State of Bihar or not. In absence of these types of factual aspects and also in absence of any law, rules, regulations or policy which creates right in the petitioner for mutual inter-State transfer, I am not inclined to issue writ of mandamus or any right or appropriate order upon the respondents for the prayers made in this petition.
4. There is no substance in this petition, hence, the same is hereby, dismissed.