Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Aug 19: High Court has held that employees have no right to remain in the borrowing department for indefinite period nor have they any vested right to claim absorption in the department where they were on deputation.
This significant judgment has been passed by Justice Sanjeev Kumar while deciding bunch of petitions filed by employees either of the Government departments or Autonomous Institutions like J&K Khadi Village and Industries Board, who have been serving in the Transport Department on deputation after having been transferred/deputed by their parent departments.
Having served in the Department of Transport for years together, the petitioners claim that they have acquired an indefeasible right of being permanently absorbed in the Transport Department and therefore cannot be repatriated to their parent departments.
After hearing battery of lawyers, Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, “there is plethora of judicial precedents dealing with the scope of deputation in which it is now unequivocally settled that ‘deputationist’ has no vested right either to continue in the borrowing department indefinitely or to seek his absorption in the borrowing department even on the strength of his length of service in the borrowing department”.
“A deputationist being on a temporary posting in the borrowing department is liable to be repatriated and can always be repatriated to his parent department at any time. Moreover, the deputationist has no right to make any grievance particularly when he is not in any manner prejudiced or adversely affected”, High Court said, adding “the plea of the petitioners that they are required to be treated as permanent employees of the Transport Department as their lien in the parent department has been terminated also cannot be accepted”.
“Needless to say that termination of lien by the parent department is a condition subsequent to absorption. When the petitioners were never permanently absorbed in the Department of Transport by any formal order nor was there any process initiated in terms of Rules to do so, there was no justification with the parent department of the petitioners to terminate their lien”, the High Court said, adding “the termination of their lien by the parent departments is, therefore, void ab initio and, therefore, the petitioners shall be deemed to be in the service of their parent departments, the termination of their lien notwithstanding”.
Follow our WhatsApp channel