Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 355 (CHH)

C. N. SINGH v. STATE OF C. G.

2011-11-16

SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI

body2011
ORDER 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure P), whereby, the petitioner working as Joint Director, Agriculture, Bilaspur, has been transferred to Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur (for short 'IGKVV'), on the post of Deputy Registrar. 2. Shri Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an employee of Agriculture Department of the State of Chhattisgarh and by the impugned order, he has been transferred to a different establishment which is not permissible under the law. Thus, it can be inferred that the petitioner has been sent on deputation and that too, without obtaining his consent. 3. On the other hand, Shri Bhaduri, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent No. 1 and 2 submits that the impugned transfer was made on account of administrative exigency. He further submits that the IGKVV, is also under the control of the State Government, Department of Agriculture, therefore, there was no need of any consent of the petitioner before transferring him to the IGKVV. He further submits that the post of Deputy Registrar is an En cadre post of Agriculture Department. Thus, there is no infirmity in transferring the petitioner from Agriculture Department to IGKVV. 4. The Chhattisgarh Agricultural (Gazetted) Services Recruitment Rules, 2011 was made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, regulating the service conditions of all the Agricultural (Gazetted) officers. In Schedule-I annexed to the rules, wherein the setup of the officers has been provided, there is no post of Deputy Registrar in Agriculture Department. Thus, the contention of the learned counsel for the State that the post of Deputy Registrar, Agricultural University, is an En-Cadre post, is not correct. Shri Bhaduri relies on a letter dated 14.07.2006 (Annexure R/1-1) of the State Government, wherein the setup of the University has been given. In respect of Deputy Registrar, there are two sanctioned posts, one is to be appointed on deputation from the post of Joint Director, Agriculture and the other, from academics. Further, reliance of the State on minutes of the proceedings, which is an internal procedure, that employee of IGKVV have been mentioned against the Additional Director, Joint Director and Deputy Director. Thus, it became En-cadre post, is without any basis. Further, reliance of the State on minutes of the proceedings, which is an internal procedure, that employee of IGKVV have been mentioned against the Additional Director, Joint Director and Deputy Director. Thus, it became En-cadre post, is without any basis. Mentioning a post of IGKVV against the post of State employee indicate that one may be posted in the University on deputation, the post of Deputy Registrar, Agriculture University, and it does not make one Encadre post. 5. In view of the foregoing, admittedly, the petitioner working as Joint Director, Agriculture, has been posted on the post of Deputy Registrar, IGKVV on deputation. 6. Law on deputation has clearly been defined by this Court in Azad Mohammad Khan Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Another 2008 (2) BLJ 47, after placing reliance upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions. 7. The word 'deputation' has been considered in State of Punjab & Others Vs. Inder Singh & Others (1997 8 SCC 372) wherein, the Supreme Court, observed as under: "18. The concept of "deputation" is well understood in service law and has a recognised meaning. "Deputation" has a different connotation in service law and the dictionary meaning of the word "deputation" is of no help. In simple words "deputation" means service outside the cadre or outside the parent department. Deputation is deputing or transferring an employee to a post outside his cadre, that is to say, to another department on a temporary basis. After the expiry period of deputation the employee has to come back to his parent department to occupy the same position unless in the meanwhile he has earned promotion in his parent department as per the Recruitment Rules. Whether the transfer is outside the normal field of deployment or not is decided by the authority who controls the service or post from which the employee is transferred. There can be no deputation without the consent of the person so deputed and he would, therefore, know his rights and privileges in the deputation post. The law on deputation and repatriation is quite settled as we have also seen in various judgments which we have referred to above...." 8. The Supreme Court, in Umapati Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar & Another(1999) 4 SCC 659, the word 'deputation' has been defined in the following terms: "8. The law on deputation and repatriation is quite settled as we have also seen in various judgments which we have referred to above...." 8. The Supreme Court, in Umapati Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar & Another(1999) 4 SCC 659, the word 'deputation' has been defined in the following terms: "8. Deputation can be aptly described as an assignment of an employee (commonly referred to as the deputationist) of one department or cadre or even an organisation (commonly referred to as the parent department or lending authority) to another department or cadre or organisation (commonly referred to as the borrowing authority). The necessity for sending on deputation arises in public interest to meet the exigencies of public service. The concept of deputation is consensual and involves a voluntary decision of the employer to lend the services of his employee and a corresponding acceptance of such services by the borrowing employer. It also involves the consent of the employee to go on deputation or not.” 9. Further, in Kunal Nanda Vs. Union of India & Another (2000) 5 SCC 362, the Supreme Court held as under: "6... ..The basic principle underlying deputation itself is that the person concerned can always and at any time be repatriated to his parent department to serve in his substantive position therein at the instance of either of the departments and there is no vested right in such a person to continue for long on deputation or get absorbed in the department to which he had gone on deputation..." 10. In Prasar Bharti & Others Vs. Amarjeet Singh & Others AIR 2007 SC 1269, the Supreme Court observed as under: "13. There exists a distinction between 'transfer" and "deputation". "Deputation" connotes service outside the cadre or outside the parent department in which an employee is serving. "Transfer", however, is limited to equivalent post in the same cadre and in the same department. Whereas deputation would be a temporary phenomenon, transfer being antithesis must exhibit the opposite indications." 11. Applying the well settled principles of law to the facts of the case on hand, wherein the transfer of the petitioner to the IGKVV comes within the definition of deputation, and the impugned order has been passed without the consent of the petitioner, the order is bad and unsustainable in law. 12. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure P/l) in respect of the petitioner, is quashed. 12. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure P/l) in respect of the petitioner, is quashed. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. 13. No order as to costs. Petition Allowed.