2026:JHHC:19178 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2565 of 2025 Radheshyam Prasad, son of Late Ramanand Prasad, aged about 53 years, resident of Flat No. 904/D, Reblon Impex, Basudev Nagar, Kantatoli, P.O.-G.P.O.,, P.S. Lower Bazar, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. …… Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through its Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 2. The Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms & Rajbhasha Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, Rajbanshi Nagar, P.O. Bailey Road, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District Patna, Bihar. 4. Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Rajbanshi Nagar, P.O. Bailey Road, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District Patna, Bihar. 5. Union of India, through the Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India, North Block, Central Secretariat, P.O. Central Secretariat, P.S. North Block, New Delhi. 6. The Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India, North Block, Central Secretariat, P.O. Central Secretariat, P.S. North Block, New Delhi. 7. AnilSon Lakra, S/O Anslem Lakra Ro Bharom Toli P.O. P.S. Bariatu Dist Ranchi. 8. Leyakat Ali, S/O Late Ali Mohhamad Ro Behind Arbindo Nagar Doranda P.O. P.S. Doranda Dist Ranchi 83400. 9. Dileshwar Mahto, S/O Chaudhari Mahto Ro Jaiprakash Nagar New Nagar Bariatu P.O. P.S. Bariatu Dist Ranchi 10. Pawan Kumar Mandal, S/O Shanti Prasad Mandal Ro Panchwati Puram Colony P.O. Bariatu P.S. Sadar Dist Ranchi. 11. Alok Shikari Kachhap, S/O Tunu Kachhap Ro Bada Ghaghra Khushbu Toli P.O. P.S. Doranda Dist Ranchi. 12. Sanjay P M Kujur, S/O James Christopher Kujur Ro A 56 Harmu Housing Colony P.O. GP.O. P.S. Argora Dist Ranchi. 13. Ishteaque Ahmad, S/O Reyasat Hussain Ansari Ro Church Road Konka Vikrant Chowk P.O. GP.O. P.S. Lower Bazar Thana Dist Ranchi. 2026:JHHC:19178 2 14. Rajeev Ranjan, S/O Satya Narayan Prasad Ro Janki Kutir Nawabganj P.O. Hazaribagh P.S. Sadar Dist Hazaribagh. 15. Nagendra Paswan, S/O Chhatradhari Ram Ro Jalaundh P.O. P.S. Hazaribagh Dist Hazaribagh 16. Jharkhand Administrative Services Association Office At D 12 Officers Flat Booty Road Ranchi 834001 Through Its General Secretary Sri Rahul Kumar Age 42 Years S/O Late Arun Kumar Residing At E3 48 Sail City New Pundag P.S. Pundag P.O. Sail City Ranchi. 17. Akhilesh Kumar, S/O Late Bangali Singh Ro Dhobi Talab P.O. Chaibasa And P.S. Sadar Dist West Singhbhum. 18. Sandip Kumar Doraiburu, S/O Late Markandey Doraiburu Ro Vill Pata Guria Chaibasa P.O. Bara Guria And P.S. Muffasil Dist WestSinghbhum 19. Onil Clement Orea, S/O Late James Peter Orea Ro Catholic Ashram Bhurkunda P.O. Bhadaininagar And P.S. Bhurkhunda Dist Ramgarh. 20. Moinuddin Khan, S/O Late Isteyak Ahmed Ro Flat No B/404 Block B Aishwarya Enclave Tiwary Tank Road Hindpidi P.O.st GP.O. Ranchi P.S. Hindpidi Ranchi Jharkhand. 21. Ranjeeta Hembrom, S/O Late John Hembrom Ro Vill Pancham Nagar Behind Bsnl Tower P.O.st Pundag P.S. Argora Dist Ranchi. 22. Ravi Raj Sharma, S/O Pratap Narayan Sharma Ro A 2 Lateitaliano Apartment Kuwar Singh Colony Road No 4 Air Port Road Hinno P.O.st P.S. Doranda Ranchi 23. Md Mustaquim Ansari S/O Md Alim Ansari Ro Joda Talab Bariatu P.O. P.S. Bariatu Ranchi 24. Shyam Narayan Ram S/O Late Ram Dhani Ram Ro 3d Global Grand Square Pundag Road Near Anand Gas Goddam P.O. P.S. Argora Ranchi 25. Rajesh Prajapati S/O Nandlal Prajapati Ro Ward No 5 Kisko More Shanti Nagar Kutmu P.O. Lohardaga And P.S. Lohardaga Dist Lohardaga 26. Seema Kumari Udaipuri Do Late Chhathu Lal Udaipuri Ro Vishnu Mandir Road Daltonganj P.O. P.S. And Dist Daltonganj. 27. Manju Rani Swansi Do Sukhlal Swansi Ro Dimna Residency D 10 P.O. P.S. Mango Dist East Singhbhum 28. Menka Do Late Lallu Prasad Hemant Ro Sector 1c Q No 83 P.O. And P.S. Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro 29. Praveen Kumar Gagrai S/O B N Gagrai Ro Lower Karamtoli P.O. Morhabadi And P.S. Lalpur Dist Ranchi 2026:JHHC:19178 3 30. Niranjan Kumar S/O Late Darshan Mandal Ro Nirmal Chaya Apartment Flat No 1b Opp Argora P.O.st Office P.O. And P.S. Argora Dist Ranchi 31. Dilip Tirkey S/O Simon Tirkey Ro Pancham Nagar Pipartoli P.O. And P.S. Argora Dist Ranchi 32. Sanjay Kumar Bhagat S/O Sitaram Bhagat Ro Pancham Nagar Argora Pipartoli P.O. Pundag P.S. Argora Dist Ranchi 33. Sunil Dutt Xaxa S/O Late Alphonce Xaxa Ro Naya Toli Debadih P.O. Doranda P.S. Doranda Dist Ranchi. 34. Saroj Tirkey S/O Late Sylvester Tirkey Ro Lalpur Peace Road P.O. Lalpur And P.S. Lalpur Dist Ranchi 35. Praveen Kumar Prakash S/O Tribhuwan Kr Mahto Ro Quarter No D22 Officers Quarter Booty Road Near Rajbhawan P.O. Sadar P.S. Lalpur Dist Ranchi 36. Vidya Bhushan Kumar S/O Kameshwar Kumar Ro Duplex Kl The Green Garden Hesag Singh More Hatia Ranchi P.S. Hatia Dist Ranchi. 37. Prem Kumari Tiwari S/O Ramakant Tiwari Ro Vill Bayen Dist Garhwa 38. Manisha Tirkey Do Philician Tirkey Ro Flat No 4c Ohma Erpa Apartment Shukhla Colony Hinoo Ranchi 39. Usha Mundu Wo Karam Singh Munda Ro Flat No E 6 Sidharth Enclave Hawai Nagar Ranchi Dist Ranchi 40. Mahendra Kumar S/O S/Oma Mahto Ro Sunday Market Colony P.O. Ratu P.S. Ratu Dist Ranchi 41. Ajay Kumar Saw S/O R B Saw Ro Dharini Road No 3n Vrindavan Van Colony Boreya Road Dist Ranchi 42. Sarojni Anie Tirkey Do Benjamin Tirkey Ro Baithnia Dibadih P.O. Doranda Dist Ranchi 43. Roushan Kumar Sah S/O Naresh Prasad Sah Flat No E4 4a Sail City Ranchi Dist Ranchi 44. Ranjeet Lohra S/O Durga Charan Lohra Ro Vill And P.O.st Sataki P.S. Angara Dist Ranchi. 45. Vishal Deep Khalkho S/O Shanti Puran Khalkho Ro 605 Gulmohar Residency Estates ModicomP.O.und Lalpur Behind Hotel Arya P.O. And P.S. Lalpur Ranchi. 46. Suman Pathak Wo Dilip Kumar Pathak Vrindavan Colony Chiroundi Kanke Ranchi 47. Manish Kumar S/O R Prasad Lajpat Nagar Pundag Ranchi 48. Shailendra Kumar Rajak S/O Late Bhagirath Rajak Ro Vill P.O. P.S. Amrapara Dist Pakur 2026:JHHC:19178 4 49. Amit Besra S/O Charan Besra Ro Lower Karamtoli Ranchi Dist Ranchi 50. Santosh Singh S/O Shri Rajvansh Singh Magistrate Colony Hazaribagh 51. Satyabeer Rajak S/O R K Rajak At Siltha P.O. Khuthan P.S. Hansdiha Dist Dumka 52. Shahanshah Ali Khan Co Late Aminul Hassan Khan Ro Khajekallan Patna City Dist Patna. …… Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For Petitioner : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate Mr. Kumar Rahul Kamlesh, Advocate For Union of India : Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI Mr. Radha Krishna Gupta, CGC For State of Jharkhand: Ms. Oishi Das, A.C. to A.G. For State of Bihar : Mr. S.P. Roy, Advocate For Intervenor : Ms. Swati Shalini, Advocate Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocate Mr. Harsh Kumar, Advocate. CAV on: 23/06/2026 Pronounced on :01/07/2026. 1. The instant writ petition was tagged with W.P.(S) No. 6426 of 2024 (Ajay Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and both the said writ petitions were heard together and Judgment was also reserved on 23rd June, 2026 in both the writ petitions. Apart from other prayers, a common prayer was made in both the writ petitions for quashing Letter bearing Memo No. 6160 dated 23.09.2024 issued by Respondent- Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand. 2. However, while going through the records of both the cases, I have noticed a significant difference in material facts of the said two cases and, hence, separate Judgment is being delivered in both the cases. Material distinguishing fact in both the cases is that in the case of present Petitioner i.e. Radheshyam Prasad, his final cadre allocation, upon 2026:JHHC:19178 5 mutual transfer/allocation, took place on 21.06.2006 and no condition was imposed in said allocation order that Petitioner would be placed at the bottom of the seniority of his batch upon cadre allocation. Per contra, in the case of Ajay Kumar Singh i.e. W.P.(S) No. 6426 of 2024, mutual allocation order is dated 06.09.2010 wherein a specific condition was inserted that seniority would be determined in terms of Letter No. 277 dated 03.02.2009 issued by Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. In view of above, both the writ petitions have been segregated and separate Judgment is being delivered. 3. Following issues are involved in the present case:- (i) Whether Respondent-State of Jharkhand can incorporate a new condition of service upon Petitioner consequent to his mutual cadre allocation in the State of Jharkhand, especially when no such condition was prescribed in mutual allocation order contained in Memo No. 5890 dated 21.06.2006? (ii) Whether facts and circumstances of the present case is distinguishable with the facts and circumstances of the case of ‘State of Bihar Vs. Ravindra Prasad Singh & Ors : (2014) 3 JLJR 76 (HC), and is, in fact, covered by the Judgment rendered in the case of ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha : (2009) 2 JLJR 750 (HC)? 4. By virtue of Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000, existing State of Bihar was bifurcated and a new State i.e. State of Jharkhand was created with effect from 15.11.2000. In terms of Section 72(2) of Bihar Re- organization Act, 2000, Central Government was required to allocate cadre and post in various services of undivided State of Bihar. The Central Government framed certain schemes for division of cadre and after preparation of tentative allocation list and invitation of objections 2026:JHHC:19178 6 from employees, final “Allocation Orders” were issued. Thereafter, number of employees filed representations regarding their final cadre allocation, and, on 15.09.2004, Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India wrote letter to Chief Secretary(s) of Government of Bihar and Government of Jharkhand indicating, inter alia, that representations made on behalf of certain categories of employees may be considered. In the said letter it was clearly stipulated that in respect of representations received from employees for mutual transfer/allocation of cadre with another consenting State personnel can be considered by the successor State Governments on a broad consensus arrived between the State Governments either defining the terms and conditions of such consideration or by framing suitable rules for this purpose. 5. Consequent upon such direction, Special Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, vide Letter dated 21.05.2005, requested the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand to entertain applications for mutual transfers on following conditions:- (i) Both employees belong to the same service and cadre. (ii) Both employees are of equivalent pay-scale and have the same level of seniority. (iii) Both employees have same marital status, so that the matters related to spouse regarding posting in the same State, conflict of decisions did not arise. (iv) Both employees have not exercised option earlier or their option has not been considered. (v) Request is being made for allocation of service in the State to which they are original inhabitant of that State. (vi) Due to illness or arise of any other casual reasons, allocation of service in another State has become necessary. 6. The State of Jharkhand, vide its Letter No. 2092 dated 01.07.2005, gave its consent to aforesaid policy decision of State of 2026:JHHC:19178 7 Bihar and, thus, both successor States agreed on the conditions of mutual cadre allocation, specified above, which did not contain any stipulation of the employees losing their seniority by placing them at the bottom of seniority of their batch. 7. Accordingly, this petitioner along with one Manju Prasad filed a joint application dated 1st July, 2005 seeking mutual transfer/allocation of cadre from State of Bihar to State of Jharkhand and vice versa. Said application submitted was forwarded by Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar to State of Jharkhand vide Letter No. 4875 dated 11.07.2005 and State of Jharkhand granted its concurrence to aforesaid request and, accordingly, vide Departmental Notification contained in Memo No. 5890 dated 21.06.2006, successor State of Bihar relieved the petitioner for submitting his joining in the State of Jharkhand. 8. Admittedly, in the said order, no condition was incorporated that petitioner would be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of his batch. 9. However, from the facts pleaded, it transpires that subsequently both the successor States started taking contradictory stand regarding seniority of employees who have been allocated cadre on mutual transfer/allocation. In fact, Government of Jharkhand, vide its letter dated 21.12.2006, informed the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar that Government of Jharkhand has taken a decision to entertain 2026:JHHC:19178 8 applications seeking change in cadre allocation under the following conditions. (i) Such employees whose final cadre allocation has been done against their option. (ii) Cadre revision shall be considered only on the basis of availability of post. (iii) Claim for seniority as a result of cadre revision shall not be admissible i.e., he shall be placed as the most junior in his category/cadre. (iv) Till issue of this order or those cadres whose final allocation is awaited, facility of cadre revision shall be admissible only against representations received within four months of final allocation. 10. The record further reveals that on 26.04.2007, a High-Powered Committee meeting of State Re-organization Committee was held and in the said meeting, it was noted that since in earlier communication contained in Letter No. 3479 dated 21.05.2005, no condition of downgrading of seniority in cases of mutual transfer/allocation was provided; seniority of such employee would not be affected. However, State of Jharkhand, vide its Memo No. 4450 dated 19.07.2008, circulated its decision that in case of mutual allocation of cadre, employees will not be given benefit of their original seniority and would be treated as junior-most employees of their batch and category. 11. Subsequently, State of Bihar, vide Letter No. 277 dated 03.02.2009, also communicated to State of Jharkhand its decision in the case of mutual transfer/allocation of cadre by indicating, inter alia, that claim of seniority of such employees would not be entertained and such employees would be treated as junior-most employees of their batch and category. 2026:JHHC:19178 9 12. However, a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 3844 of 2008 (Rajendra Pratap Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand) was filed before this Court, wherein said employee-Rajendra Pratap Sinha, who was already allocated Jharkhand Cadre on mutual transfer vide Memo No. 8148 dated 19.07.2006, challenged his subsequent degradation of his seniority in view of decision of State of Jharkhand contained in Memo No. 4450 dated 19.07.2008. Said writ petition was allowed by the Ld. Single Judge by taking into consideration provisions of Section 73 of Bihar Re- organization Act and it was held that seniority of said writ petitioner- Rajendra Pratap Sinha should not be altered. 13. In the case at hand, admittedly; since in mutual allocation order of present writ petitioner, no condition was stipulated of downgrading of his seniority, State of Jharkhand vide order contained in Memo No. 6672 dated 29.10.2010 determined the seniority of the petitioner at Serial No. 835-B in common seniority list and, thereafter, petitioner has been granted promotions in the years 2011, 2016 and 2023 being the last promotion given vide Memo No. 2581 dated 04.05.2023 in the category of Joint Secretary and equivalent post, as petitioner is under Jharkhand Administrative Service. 14. Despite aforesaid fact, dispute has arisen regarding seniority of petitioner, and, State of Jharkhand vide Letter No. 6160 dated 23.09.2024 passed order giving retrospective application of its earlier order contained in Memo No. 4450 dated 19.07.2008, wherein decision 2026:JHHC:19178 10 was taken by the State Government to place an employee at the bottom of seniority list of his batch and category in case of mutual transfer. The genesis of the said dispute arises out of a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of ‘State of Bihar Vs. Ravindra Prasad Singh & ors. (supra) and the order dated 08.12.2020 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar and Ors Vs. State of Jharkhand (W.P.(S) No. 5194 of 2019). Due to revival of earlier order, State of Jharkhand altered the seniority of Petitioner and petitioner’s seniority in final seniority list published vide Notification contained in Memo No. 8127 dated 16.12.2024 has been degraded from Serial No. 835-B to 877-D i.e. at the bottom of the seniority list of his batch and category. 15. Aggrieved by aforesaid decision dated 23.09.2024 and final seniority list dated 16.12.2024, present writ application has been filed. 16. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate along with Mr. Kumar Rahul Kamlesh, Advocate, submitted that impugned order contained in Memo No. 6160 dated 23.09.2024 issued by Respondent-State of Jharkhand giving retrospective effect of its earlier decision contained in Letter No. 4450 dated 19.07.2008 in respect of all employees against all cadres who have been allocated cadre of State of Jharkhand on the basis of mutual transfer/ allocation, suffers from perversity and complete non-application of mind. It was submitted that the Division Bench Judgment, in the case of ‘State of Bihar Vs. Ravindra Prasad Singh & Ors.’ (supra), was delivered in complete different facts and circumstances of the case, 2026:JHHC:19178 11 wherein employees were allocated Jharkhand Cadre on mutual transfer subsequent to earlier decision of State of Jharkhand contained in Memo No. 4450 dated 19.07.2008 as well as subsequent decision of State of Bihar contained in Letter No. 277 dated 03.02.2009, wherein both the States have agreed that upon mutual transfer, seniority of the employees would be affected and would be placed at the bottom of seniority of their batch and category. 17. It was submitted that it is in the aforesaid background, the Division Bench held that benefit of Section 73 would not be applicable as, admittedly, in the order of mutual transfer/allocation of said Ravindra Prasad Singh & ors., condition was stipulated regarding downgrading of their seniority. While referring to decision of Coordination Bench in the case of ‘Sanjay Kumar’, it was submitted that Coordinate Bench in the said decision has not passed any specific direction directing State of Jharkhand to implement the decision of Division Bench in the case of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ uniformly in respect of all employees of mutual transfer/allocation, irrespective of the fact that in Mutual Allocation Order of the employees, condition of downgrading of seniority was mentioned or not. 18. However, State of Jharkhand, by completely misinterpreting the Judgment of the Division Bench and Coordinate Bench of this Court, issued impugned order dated 23.09.2024 regarding downgrading of seniority of all employees of mutual transfer. 2026:JHHC:19178 12 19. Further, attention of this Court was invited to the order dated 31st October, 2023 passed by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 511 of 2019 (State of Jharkhand Vs. Rajendra Pratap Sinha). It was submitted that State of Bihar preferred Letters Patent Appeal, though belatedly, against the order of the Ld. Single Judge in the case of ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha’ and one of Judges of said Division Bench (His Lordship Mr. Justice Shree Chandrashekhar), who was also the Member of earlier Division Bench Judgment in the case of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ (supra), has dismissed the said L.P.A., specifically noticing that there was distinction of fact in the case of both ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ and ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha’. 20. Ld. Counsel has submitted that distinguishing factor is the condition in “Cadre Allotment Order” including the date when such cadre allocation took place, especially because in the case of this petitioner when cadre allocation took place, there was a consensus between the successor States that employee, on mutual cadre allocation, would not lose his seniority, whereas, in the case of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ (earlier Division Bench), there was a condition in mutual allocation order itself regarding loosing of seniority. On the strength of the above, it was submitted that impugned order contained in Memo No. 6160 dated 23.09.2024, to the extent it affects seniority of the petitioner, may be set aside and consequential order contained in Notification issued vide Memo No. 8127 dated 16.12.2024 by which petitioner’s seniority has been downgraded from 2026:JHHC:19178 13 Serial No. 835-B to Serial No. 877-D, be restored with all consequential benefits including consideration of his case for promotion along with all other similarly situated employees. 21. Per contra, Ms. Oishi Das, A.C. to A.G. vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that impugned decision of State of Jharkhand is based upon Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ (supra) as well as consequential order passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of ‘Sanjay Kumar’ (supra). She placed extensive reliance upon Judgment of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ (supra), and vehemently submitted that Division Bench in the said Judgment has considered in detail the provisions of Sections 72 and 73 of The Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 and has held that benefit of proviso to Section 73 of the said Act of 2000 would not be available to an employee who has sought mutual transfer/allocation. 22. It was submitted that although State of Jharkhand, consequent upon earlier decision of Ld. Single Bench in the case of ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha’ (supra), extended the benefit of seniority to all employees who were allocated cadre on mutual allocation basis, but Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of ‘Sanjay Kumar’ (supra) deprecated the stand taken by State of Jharkhand and, accordingly, State of Jharkhand, in compliance of the order of the Coordinate Bench including the order passed in contempt application, re-visited its decision in consonance with Division Bench Judgment in the case of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ 2026:JHHC:19178 14 (supra) and impugned decision has taken and the same is not liable to be interfered with by this Court. 23. I have carefully perused the pleadings made in the writ application including various notifications, guidelines, letters, etc. issued by Central Government, State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand regarding allocation of seniority in case of mutual transfer/allocation of cadre. 24. As noted above and under Section 72(2) of The Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, it was for the Central Government to allocate cadre and post in various services of undivided State of Bihar and said exercise was undertaken by it and final cadre allocations were issued. However, subsequent to final cadre allocation orders, several representations were filed by employees for change of their cadre either to the State of Bihar or State of Jharkhand and vice versa, and, Central Government vide communication dated 15th September, 2004 addressed to Chief Secretaries of both the successor States, laid down guidelines for consideration of such cases. In the said guidelines with respect to mutual transfer cases, it was specifically observed as under:- “A large number of representations have been received from personnel requesting for consideration of their mutual transfer with another consenting State Service personnel. Since the Central Government has already issued final allocation orders, it finds no reason to entertain such requests. However, it is open to the successor State Governments to consider requests of mutual transfer based on broad consensus arrived between the State Governments, inter alia, either defining the terms and conditions for such consideration or by framing suitable rules for this purpose.” 25. Consequent upon such guidelines, the State of Bihar, vide Letter No. 3479 dated 21.05.2005, laid down six conditions for entertaining applications for mutual transfer (already noted above) and none of said conditions stipulated that the employee would lose its 2026:JHHC:19178 15 seniority on such mutual transfer/allocation of cadre. Admittedly, State of Jharkhand vide Letter No. 2092 dated 1st July, 2005 gave its consent to aforesaid conditions for mutual transfer, and, it is only thereafter, petitioner along with one Manju Prasad, on 01.07.2005, applied for mutual transfer for allocation of cadre to State of Jharkhand and State of Bihar. 26. Ultimately, upon concurrence by both the States, vide Letter No. 5890 dated 21.06.2006, petitioner was allocated State of Jharkhand and was relieved with effect from 30.06.2006 for joining in the State of Jharkhand and no condition was stipulated in the said order regarding down-gradation of seniority of Petitioner at the bottom of seniority list of his batch/category. 27. In fact, from the records, it transpires that it is only subsequently the State of Jharkhand, vide Memo No. 4450 dated 19.07.2008, took a decision that upon mutual transfer, employees will be placed at the bottom of seniority of its batch and similar decision was taken by State of Bihar vide Letter No. 277 dated 03.02.2009. Said subsequent decision cannot affect seniority of petitioner as, firstly, at the time of mutual allocation, no such condition existed and, secondly, in mutual allocation order of the petitioner, no such condition was stipulated. 28. In fact, this Court is of the considered opinion that the case of petitioner is squarely governed by provisions of Section 73 of The Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, which reads as under:- 2026:JHHC:19178 16 “73. Other provisions relating to services. – (1) Nothing in Section 72 shall be deemed to affect on or after the appointed day the operation of the provisions of Chapter I of Part XIV of the Constitution in relation to determination of the conditions of service of persons serving in connection with the affairs of the Union or any State : Provided that the conditions of service applicable immediately before the appointed day in the case of any person deemed to have been allocated to the State of Bihar or to the State of Jharkhand under Section 72 shall not be varied to his disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government. (2) All services prior to the appointed day rendered by a person.— (a) If he is deemed to have been allocated to any State under Section 72, shall be deemed to have been rendered in connection with the affairs of that State; (b) if he is deemed to have been allocated to the Union in connection with the administration of the Jharkhand shall be deemed to have been rendered in connection with the affairs of the Union, for the purposes of the rules regulating his conditions of service. (3) The previous of Section 72, shall not apply in relation to members of any All India Service. 29. Proviso to Section 73(1) specifically stipulates that conditions of service applicable immediately before the appointed day in case of any person shall not be varied to his disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government. 30. I have carefully perused the Division Bench decision in the case of ‘State of Bihar Vs. Ravindra Prasad Singh : (2014) 3 JLJR 76 (HC). In the said Judgment, it has been specifically noted that Government of Jharkhand, vide its letter dated 21.12.2006, informed the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar that Government of Jharkhand has taken decision to entertain applications seeking change in cadre allocation with certain conditions which includes the condition of downgrading of seniority as most junior in his category/cadre. Para-5 of the said Judgment is quoted herein-under:- “5. In the light of letter dated 08.06.2006, the Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand vide letter dated 21.12.2006 informed the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar that the Government of Jharkhand has taken a decision to entertain the application seeking change in cadre allocation under the following conditions:- 2026:JHHC:19178 17 (i) Such employees whose final cadre allocation has been done against their option. (ii) Cadre revision shall be considered only on the basis of availability of post. (iii) Claim for seniority as a result of cadre revision shall not be admissible i.e., he shall be placed as the most junior in his category/cadre. (iv) Till issue of this order or those cadres whose final allocation is awaited, facility of cadre revision shall be admissible only against representations received within four months of final allocation.” Emphasis Supplied 31. Further, from the facts of the said Judgment, it would be evident that in Notification dated 05.12.2007 relating to cadre allocation of Ravindra Prasad Singh (issued after the decision of State of Jharkhand dated 21.12.2006) specific condition was incorporated that case for seniority would not be considered. It is in the said background, Division Bench in para-21 of said Judgment has held as under:- “21. It would thus appear that the protection of proviso to Section 73 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act would have been available to the respondent No.1 only in the event he would have joined service under the Government of Bihar in compliance of cadre allocation order dated 13.09.2006 and in that event his service conditions could not have been altered, in any manner to his detriment. However, pursuant to letter dated 15.09.2004 of the Government of India, the order reviewing the cadre allocation on an application for mutual transfer on certain terms and conditions agreed upon by the respective States and implemented by the Nodal Department, was altogether a different transaction and the protection under proviso to Section 73 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act is not available to the employees who sought mutual transfer and whose requests have been accepted subject to condition that they would not claim seniority as per the final gradation list. The condition stipulating loss of seniority in order dated 05.12.2007 whereby the respondent No.1 was reallocated cadre in the State of Jharkhand cannot be said to be hit by provision under Section 73 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act. The condition stipulated in order dated 05.12.2007 is binding on the respondent No.1 and the learned single Judge clearly fell in error in holding that the respondent No.1 would be entitled for his seniority as per the final gradation list, even though such a prayer was not made in the writ petition.” (Emphasis Supplied) 32. In fact, the Division Bench, while considering the appeal filed by State of Bihar against Judgment of ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha’ (supra) in its order dated 31st October, 2023, vide Para-12, has specifically noted the distinction of facts between the two cases i.e. the case of ‘Ravindra Prasad Singh’ and ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha’. In effect, if the ratio of the Judgment of both the aforesaid Division Benches is considered read with 2026:JHHC:19178 18 the Judgment of Coordinate Bench in the case of ‘Rajendra Pratap Sinha’, following ratio would emerge:- (i) Benefit of Proviso to Section 73 would not be available to employees who sought mutual transfer and their request has been accepted subject to condition that they would not claim seniority as per Final Gradation List. (ii) Benefit of Proviso to Section 73 of the Bihar Reorganization Act would be available to the employees whose mutual transfer requests were accepted without any condition of degradation of seniority in terms of the agreement reached between the successor States at the relevant time. 33. In the facts of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that benefit of first proviso to Section-73 would be available to the petitioner, as, at the relevant point of time of his mutual transfer/allocation of cadre, there was neither such condition existing regarding down-gradation of seniority; nor any such condition was mentioned in his transfer/allocation order. 34. In view of cumulative facts and circumstances of the present case, impugned order contained in Memo No. 6160 dated 23.09.2024 issued by Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, to the extent it applies the principle of down-gradation of seniority in all cases of mutual transfer/allocation, is set aside and it is declared that condition of down-gradation of seniority would be applicable only in such cases where, in the mutual allocation order itself, condition was stipulated regarding down- gradation/loss of seniority at the bottom of seniority list of batch and category of the employees. 35. Consequently, impugned Notification dated 8127 dated 16.12.2024, by which seniority of the petitioner has been downgraded 2026:JHHC:19178 19 from Serial No. 835-B to Serial No. 877-D is partially quashed and seniority of the petitioner is, hereby, restored and further direction is issued to the respondents not to discriminate the petitioner in the matter of promotions etc. with that of similarly situated employees and petitioner should be extended all consequential benefits which accrue to him on the basis of his seniority to be treated at Serial No. 835-B. 36. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. 37. Pending I.As., if any, shall stand disposed of and there shall be no order as to costs. (Deepak Roshan, J) Dated:01 /07/2026 Amardeep/ A.F.R Uploaded on 3.7.2026