condition of loss of seniority, therefore, by order dated 05.12.2007 the respondent no.1 could not have been subjected to such a condition. A perusal of letter dated 21.5.2005 makes it clear that it was a communication to the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand for sending the proposals for review of cadre allocation only of those employees who fulfilled the above mentioned 6 conditions. The conditions mentioned in letter dated 21.05.2005 are the eligibility conditions for consideration of the cases for mutual transfer and letter dated 21.05.2005 does not prescribe the terms and conditions for transfer. The contention raised on behalf of the respondent no.1 that, in the absence of any condition relating to loss of seniority prescribed in letter dated 21.05.2005, by the transfer order dated 05.12.2007 the respondent no.1 could not have been subjected to such a condition whereunder he would lose his original seniority, is thus liable to be rejected. (emphasis mine) 19. In “Rajendra Pratap Sinha” (supra), a prayer was made for restraining the State- respondents from downgrading the employee in the seniority list as stipulated in the transfer order and the learned Single Judge of this Court taking note of the provision under Section 73 of Bihar Reorganisation Act observed that since the conditions of service of the government servants whose services are allotted to the successor States shall not be changed, therefore, a provisional gradation list was published in which it was mentioned that the seniority of government servants who are allotted the Jharkhand cadre shall not be affected. However, since the seniority of the said Rajendra Pratap Sinha was sought to be altered, in view of the
