The Court held that the transfer of the petitioners was not illegal or arbitrary as it was made in pursuance of a policy decision of the State Government to subserve public good.

S. B. Sinha, J.

1. The petitioners who are 64 in number have questioned an order dated 3l-3-l992 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government, department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar (Respondent No.6) and a direction by the Joint Director of Agriculture, Kosi Division, (respondent no.5) and as contained in Annexures-11 and 12 to the writ application whereby the petitioners had been transferred outside Kosi Division. A special Agriculture Area programme started in the year 1965 in Purnea and saharsa Districts, temporarily for a period of one year. The said period had been extended from time to time.

2. According to the petitioner, the Director of Agriculture. Bihar by a letter dated 29 8-1978 directed creation of a unified cadre including the staff of Godown Keepers, Typists and Clerks as the Cadre of Lower Division clerks The said order is contained in Annexure-3 to the writ application.

3. The petitioners were allegedly promoted to the post of Upper division Clerks. By a letter dated 7-7-1982 the Joint Secretary to the government, Department of Agriculture sent a letter that the cadre of only ministerial and fourth Grade staff of Purnea and Katihar will remain separate from the Cadre of Kosi Range as before, Thereafter another gradation list was published on 16 7-1985. Some of the petitioners, thereafter were given time bound promotion to the post of Junior Selection Grade assistant.

4. However, the National Agriculture Extention project 91-92 was also started in Darbhanga under the suspices of World Bank. The Government had, however, decided not to make direct appointment to the posts of the extended project and to fill up the said post by transfer and designate the posts mentioned therein. A copy of the said letter is contained in Annexure-11 to the writ application.

5. The petitioners have been transferred to Darbhanga by reason of the said letter and pursuant thereto the Joint Director of Agriculture project, executive Engineer were directed to transfer the petitioners by a letter dated 28-4-1992.

6. It has been stated that those persons, who have been appointed after the petitioners and are still working, have been retained whereas the petitioners who are seniors have been transferred.

7. Mr. Anil Kumar, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has raised a short question in support of this application. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioners belonging the cadre cannot be transferred to another cadre without their consent. It was further submitted that if the petitioners are transferred to darbhanga Division they were loose their seniority.

8. It is true that normally employees cannot be transferred to one cadre to another cadre without (illeg ) their consent. However, by a letter dated 7th July, 1982 as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application, it appears that the order was passed that the Joint Director shall pass order for transfer inter alia in respect of the employees of the Purnea and Katihar. However, from a letter dated 31st March, 1982 which is contained in annexure-11 to the writ application, it appears that the State of Bihar had send a letter to the Accountant-General Bihar that the State Government had taken a policy decision to extend the Agriculture Extension Development for the year 1991-92 to the four districts of the Darbhanga division, which is a matter of policy decision for the State Government. The State of bihar has also adopted a policy decision that for the said purpose no fresh appointment shall be made but the requisite posts vhould be filled up by transfer. The number of posts which are to be filled up by transfer have also been mentioned therein. Pursuant to the said order the joint Director of Katihar Division had issued the impugned order as contained in Annexure-12.

9. The state in paragraph 8 of its counter-affidavit has stated that the scale of pay of both the petitioners and village level workers are the same and the question of reduc