ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 15-01-2024 Heard Mr. Prashant Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Avinash Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the BIADA.

2. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the Memo No.2241 dated 24.04.2012 passed by the respondent No.2 by which respondent No.2 has rejected the claim of back wages of the petitioner while the respondent No.1 did not pass any order under Rule 97 of the Bihar Service Code. Further prayer for a direction upon the respondent authorities to make payment of back wages of the petitioner for the period from 03.11.2007 to 10.02.2012 i.e. the period during which the petitioner was illegally remained under the compulsory retirement by an illegal order passed by the respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main question arising in the present writ application is that whether the respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order contained in Memo No.2241 dated 24.04.2012 and the respondent No.1 has not passed any order against the petitioner but the respondent No.2 passed an order rejecting the claim of the petitioner and as per Rule 97 of Bihar Service Code, the respondent No.2 was