JUDGMENT : S. Panda, J. - This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is working as Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar challenging the notification dated 27.8.2013 under Annexure-7 issued by the Government of Odisha in Agriculture Department repatriating the petitioner to Odisha University of Agriculture and Technology. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has joined as Assistant Professor in Odisha University of Agriculture and Technology (hereinafter referred to as 'OUAT') w.e.f. 11.7.1994 and thereafter as Associate Professor on 30.9.2009. It was decided by the Central Government as well as all State Governments that the Chief Executive Officers/Managing Directors of any Public Sector Undertaking of Central Government or State Government is to be appointed through open advertisement for better competition for getting suitable candidate to manage the Public Sector Undertakings in their modem skill of management. By this process, long practice of allowing bureaucrats i.e. either State Level Officer or All India Level Officer can be avoided and the new talents can make their efforts to bring Public Sector Undertakings as profit making organization. In pursuance of the aforesaid decision, the Government of Odisha in Public Enterprise Department has selected number of Chief Executives of different Public Sectors like; OPTCL, OHPC, CESU, OICC, IDCO, IPCOL etc. during the last four to five years. An advertisement was issued by the Public Enterprise Department of Government of Odisha to fill up the post of Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar. The petitioner applied for the said post and was selected through selection process i.e. a Selection Board consists of Chief Secretary of Odisha as Chairman, Principal Secretary of Government of Odisha, Public Enterprise Department, Principal Secretary of Agriculture as Member and two outsider experts having experience in the practical field. Thereafter, opposite party No. 2 issued a notification on 20.1.2012 under Annexure-1 stating that on recommendation of the Public Enterprise Selection Board, Government of Odisha have been pleased to appoint the petitioner as Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd. On 17.3.2012 the Government of Odisha/Agriculture Department has issued another notification under Annexure-2 stating that in supersession of the earlier notification dated 20.1.2012 the petitioner is hereby posted as Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar on deputation on foreign service terms and conditions for a period of three years. While the petitioner was continuing as such, on 20.11.2012 opposite party No. 2 issued a notice to the petitioner under Annexure-3 to show cause as to why suitable action should not be taken against him for his serious omission/misconduct in supply of certified seeds for Rabi Season 2012-13. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted his reply on 23.11.2012 under Annexure-4 stating that the target of seed supply plan to distribute 2014, 16.86 quintals during Rabi Season 2012-13 starting from 1.10.2012 but the supply plan was received by the Corporation on 28.9.2012 i.e. only four days to effect seeds supply. The petitioner has also stated in his reply that the approval of the cost of seed including procurement cost, sale price was received on 30.10.2012 i.e. after a lot of persuasion by the petitioner. The opposite party No. 2 has to approve the cost and late price approval was stood on the way of timely supply of available stock. Hence, receipt of approved cost structure at a very belated stage resulted in not only delayed procurement of seeds from outside State agencies but also supply of seeds to the PACS/Dealers for sale to the farmers. While the petitioner was on leave due to his illness, the Government of Odisha in Agriculture Department issued the impugned notification on 27.8.2013 under Annexure-7 stating that the petitioner is repatriated to OUAT and opposite party No. 4, who was working as Joint Director Agriculture (Information) is posted in place of the petitioner in addition to his own duties till a regular substitute is selected and posted. 3. A counter-affidavit has been filed by opposite party No. 2 inter alia taking the stand that after completion of one year deputation granted by OUAT to the petitioner vide order dated 22.3.2012 under Annexure-A/2 for adequate reasons and expiry of the deputation period, the parent department of the petitioner withdrew the deputation and requested the Principal Secretary of Agriculture Department to relieve the petitioner vide order dated 30.3.2013 under Annexure-B/2 to enable him to join in his former post at Chipilima as the service of the petitioner was felt essential to OUAT and basing on such request the impugned order dated 27.8.2013 under Annexure-7 was passed. 4. 4. Opposite party No. 4 has also filed a counter affidavit stating therein that during his incumbency the petitioner has neglected and not acted upon the decision of the Government and miserably failed in his duty in supplying seeds for Rabi Season 2012-13. That apart the petitioner has not taken any disciplinary 'action against the erring officer, who was responsible for non-supply of seeds to the farmers despite the direction of the Government. It is further stated that the petitioner is a deputationist and the parent department of the petitioner has also requested the Corporation to relieve him from the post on the ground that the service of the petitioner is highly essential. 5. This Court by interim order dated 20.9.2013 in Misc. Case No. 18576 of 2013 directed that there shall be stay operation of the notification dated 27.8.2013 issued by the Principal Secretary to Government in its Agriculture Department under Annexure-7 till the next date and the petitioner shall continue in the Odisha State Seeds Corporation till the next date. In pursuance of the said order the petitioner is continuing as such. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the advertisement for the post of Managing Director in Orissa State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar was issued on 16.3.2011 wherein it was specifically stated that the tenure of appointment is for three years initially, subject to extension based on performance and as per the requirement of the Corporation. He further submitted that the authorities have followed the said tenure in the order of appointment issued in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner also requested to accept his joining report as a deputationist. Therefore, the plea now taken by opposite party No. 2 that on the request of OUAT to take back the petitioner to the University, the impugned order has been passed is not correct. It is stated that as the petitioner has given his reply vide letter dated 23.11.2012 under Annexure-4 to opposite party No. 2, the said opposite party has passed the impugned order without obtaining clarification/permission from opposite party No. 1 to take such illegal action against the petitioner. It is further stated that from the date of joining of the petitioner, opposite party No. 2 has never informed him about his lapse on his performance. It is further stated that from the date of joining of the petitioner, opposite party No. 2 has never informed him about his lapse on his performance. It is also stated that as the impugned order has been passed without following the principles of natural justice, the same needs to be interfered with. In support of his contention, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 2007 SC 2204 and (2011) 6 SCC 570 : (AIR 2011 SC (Supp) 659). 6.1 In the case of Union of India and another v. Shardindu reported in AIR 2007 SC 2204 the Supreme Court held that a person appointed for fixed tenure, his tenure cannot be cut short on basis of acts not enumerated as disqualifications for appointment and appointment being statutory, the doctrine of pleasure cannot be invoked. The term cannot be terminated by holding him to be deputationist. 6.2 In the case of J.S. Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another reported in (2011) 6 SCC 570 : (AIR 2011 SC (Supp) 659) the Supreme Court held that no order can be passed behind the back of a person adversely affecting him and such an order if passed, is liable to be ignored being not binding on such a party as the same has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. 7. Learned Addl. Government Advocate submitted that the Registrar of OUAT vide his letter dated 23.3.2012 under Annexure-A/2 allowed the petitioner to join as Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar on deputation for a period of one year on foreign service terms and conditions. He further submitted that after completion of the said period the Registrar of OUAT again written a letter on 30.3.2013 under Annexure-B/2 to relieve the petitioner as his services is highly essential to the organization. Considering the said letter, the impugned order has been passed and the same needs no interference. 8. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party No. 4 submitted that the petitioner was relieved from OUAT to join as Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar on deputation for a period of one year on Foreign Service terms and conditions. Considering the said letter, the impugned order has been passed and the same needs no interference. 8. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party No. 4 submitted that the petitioner was relieved from OUAT to join as Managing Director of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar on deputation for a period of one year on Foreign Service terms and conditions. He further submitted that the Registrar of OUAT vide his letter dated 30.3.2013 intimated opposite party No. 2 that the deputation period of the petitioner has already expired on 22.3.2013 and as his services is highly essential to the organization he may be relieved from the present assignment to enable him to join in his former post at RRTTS, Chiplima. It is stated that a person who was sent on deputation after expiry of his deputation period has no right to continue, therefore, opposite party No. 2 has rightly passed the impugned notification dated 27.8.2013 under Annexure-7 and the same need not be interfered with. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the materials available on record, it appears that in the advertisement dated 16.3.2011 for the post of Managing Director in Orissa State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar it was specifically stated that the tenure of appointment is for three years initially, subject to extension based on performance and as per the requirement of the Corporation. The Performance Report of the Corporation for the year 2012-13 reveals that there was a profit of Rs. 2529.79 lakhs. The Joint Secretary to Government of Odisha, Department of Public Enterprises vide his letter dated 17.12.2011 intimated opposite party No. 2 that on the recommendation of the Public Enterprises Selection Board held on 16.6.2011 the petitioner has been selected for appointment to the post of Managing Director in Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd. with the usual terms and conditions as per the advertisement and the Agriculture Department may issue an appointment order in favour of the petitioner after obtaining Government approval at their level. The said recommendation was made on receipt of the request letter of the petitioner to appoint him on deputation, therefore, the plea taken by opposite party No. 2 that the petitioner is a deputationist for only one year is not acceptable. The said recommendation was made on receipt of the request letter of the petitioner to appoint him on deputation, therefore, the plea taken by opposite party No. 2 that the petitioner is a deputationist for only one year is not acceptable. Government has approved the appointment of the petitioner as a deputationist for a term of three years as per the advertisement, therefore, the doctrine of pleasure cannot be invoked by opposite party No. 2. 10. In view of the above, this Court while quashing the impugned notification dated 27.8.2013 under Annexure-7 issued by the Principal Secretary to Government of Odisha in Agriculture Department - opposite party No. 2 repatriating the petitioner to OUAT, remits the matter back to opposite party No. 1 to reconsider the entire process and take a fresh decision for the better interest of Odisha State Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar as well as public, as expeditiously as possible. 11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. The interim order dated 20.9.2013 passed by this Court in Misc. Case No. 18576 of 2013 stands vacated.