Mushtaq Ahmad Bhat & Ors vs Union Territory Of Jammu And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 949 j&K/2

                                                                         Serial No.04
                                                                      Regular Cause List

      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT SRINAGAR



                WP(C) No. 618/2021; CM No. 1852/2021 c/w
                     WP(C) No. 248/2021; 892/2021

                                                       Dated: 24th of August, 2021.

Mushtaq Ahmad Bhat & Ors.

                                                              ..... Petitioner(s)
                               Through: -
                   Mr S. A. Makroo, Senior Advocate with
                       Mr Danish Yousuf, Advocate.

                                      V/s

Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.
                                                            ..... Respondent(s)

Through: -

Mr Mohammad Rais-ud-Din Ganai, Government Advocate.

CORAM:

Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.

(JUDGMENT)

WP(C) No. 618/2021; CM No. 1852/2021:

01. Impugned herein this Petition is Government Order No. 255-

JK(GAD) of 2021 dated 22nd of March, 2021, whereby the Petitioners,

employees of Jammu and Kashmir Industries Limited (for short 'the JKI

Limited'), have been repatriated to their parent Organization immediately.

02. The Petitioners claim to have been employed in the J&K

Cements Limited on various posts. It is stated that the Petitioners rose to their

respective levels by the dint of their hard work and were aspiring to achieve

higher levels in the JKI Limited, but their dreams were shattered when the JKI

Limited, once a profit-making Organization and premier in the field of

WP(C) No. 618/2021 c/w WP(C) No. 248/2021

Industries, suffered losses, thereby resulting in the Organization having been

declared as a 'Sick Industry'. Accordingly, the list of surplus staff is stated to

have been furnished to the General Administration Department of the

Government of Jammu and Kashmir with the request that the said surplus staff

be adjusted/ deployed in other Government Departments so that the

expenditure on account of monthly establishment/ salary cost may be reduced.

The Government, in the General Administration Department, as stated, took

up the matter with the Industries & Commerce Department and, after

obtaining the requisite 'No Objection' from them, deployed the aforesaid

surplus staff in various Government Departments. It is pleaded that the

Petitioners are discharging their duties in the said Government Departments

to the best satisfaction of their superior Officers, however, in terms of the

Government Order No. 255-JK(GAD) of 2021 dated 22nd of March, 2021, the

Petitioners stand repatriated to their parent Organization. It is this Government

Order that the Petitioners have called in question before this Court through

the medium of the instant Petition.

03. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings

on record and considered the matter.

04. It is admitted position that the Petitioners have been deputed to

various Government Departments by the competent authority upon their

declaration as surplus staff of the JKI Limited. There is also no dispute with

regard to the implication of Article 52(C) of Jammu and Kashmir Civil

Service Regulations, 1956 SR to the cases of the employees who have been

deputed to various non-Government Organizations, including Corporations,

WP(C) No. 618/2021 c/w WP(C) No. 248/2021

Companies, Autonomous Bodies, etc., but the Court has to only consider as

to what is wrong with the decision of the Respondents in issuing the impugned

Government Order, thereby repatriating the Petitioners to their parent

Organization/ Department. What is, thus, required to be seen in terms of the

applicable laws governing the subject is as to whether the Petitioners have any

right to claim continuation in the Government Departments where they have

been deputed as 'Deputationists' or, to put in other words, whether the

decision taken by the Respondents seeking repatriation of the Petitioners to

their parent Department from the Departments where they have been deputed

is illegal or unwarranted/ uncalled for.

05. The aforesaid moot question can be answered by the application

of the provisions of Article 52 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service

Regulations, 1956, itself, which, in no uncertain terms, emphasize that the

reversion of a 'Deputationist' can be at any stage, either by the lending or the

borrowing Department and that a 'Deputationist' has no vested right to remain

on the cadre of the Department where deputed. There, thus, is nothing wrong

in repatriation of the Petitioners on the cadre posts of their parent Department

which they were holding in substantive position.

06. Apart from the above provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil

Service Regulations, 1956, the law on the subject of repatriation/ reversion of

'Deputationists' is no more res integra.

07. In 'Kunal Nanda v. Union of India & Anr.; AIR 2000 Supreme

Court 2076, while dealing with the issue as involved herein this Petition,

Hon'ble the Supreme Court has observed as under:

WP(C) No. 618/2021 c/w WP(C) No. 248/2021

"... 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."

08. A similar view was also taken by a Coordinate Bench of our own

High Court, in the case of 'Dr. Mohammad Deen v. State of JK & Ors.; KLJ

2000 640', while following the law laid down by the Apex Court of the

country in Kunal Nanda's case (supra).

09. For the reasons stated above, I do not find any merit in the instant

Petition and, as a sequel thereto, same shall stand dismissed accordingly,

along with the connected CM(s).

WP(C) No. 248/2021; CM No. 892/2021:

10. Although this Petition is shown to be clubbed with the

aforementioned Petition, however, the Registry has not tagged the same with

the file. Accordingly, this Petition is directed to be delinked and listed

separately on 17th of December, 2021.

11. Registry to place a copy of this Order on each file.

(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2021 "TAHIR"

                               i.    Whether the Order is reportable?                  Yes/ No.
                               ii.   Whether the Order is speaking?                    Yes/ No.




TAHIR MANZOOR BHAT
2021.08.25 14:25
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document