E.S.VENKATARAMIAH - (1.) THE 1st respondent Ashok Deshmukh was appointed as a Panchayat and Social Education Organizer in the Social Welfare Department Government of Madhya Pradesh Bhopal oil 16-8-1976. By an order dated 11/03/1983 he along with 13 others was posted on deputation as an officiating Block Development Officer in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh. THE relevant portion of the said order, posting the 1st respondent on deputation, read as follows : "Government of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat and Rural Development Department (Development) Bhopal, dated 11/03/1983 Serial Number 1719/1463/22V-2/82. THE following Panchayat and Social Education Organisers are appointed on the post of officiating Block Development Officer, temporarily and on deputation, from the date of taking charge in the pay scale of Rs. 350-25-400-25-500 E.B.-30-650 until further orders and they are posted in Development Block shown against their names. This posting on deputation would be entirely temporary and they would not be entitled to become semipermanent or permanent on this post., If required their services may be transferred back to their parental department at any time, after notice. JUDGEMENT_503_3_1988Html1.htm In the name and according to the order of governor of Madhya Pradesh. Sd/- A.K. Chandra secretary, Govt. of M.P.Rural Development Department
(2.) THE 1st respondent was transferred' from the post of Block Development Officer, Kurwai, in Vidisha district which he was holding on deputation as aforesaid to the Development Block of Udaipura, District Raisen by an order dated 1/08/1983. On 29/06/1984 the services of the 1St respondent were placed at the disposal of his parent department by an order made by the Secretary to the Government, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Madhya Pradesh. THE said order read thus "Government of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat and Rural Development Department (Development) Bhopal, Dated 29/06/1984 ORDER No. 6297/1031/22/V-2/Est.84.- THE services of Shri Ashok Deshmukh appointed temporarily on deputation as officiating Block Development Officer, Development Block-Udaipura, Distt. Raisen, are returned back to his parental department Social Welfare Department because, the same are not required in this department. In the name and according to the orders of Governor of Madhya Pradesh. Sd/- Illegible Secretary Panchayat and Rural Development Department (Development)." Aggrieved by the said order of the State Government sending him back to his parent department, where he held his lien the 1St respondent filed a suit in Civil Suit No. 16A of 1984 in the Court of Civil Judge, Udaipura for permanent injunction restraining the Government of Madhya Pradesh from repatriating him to his parent department and he obtained an order of temporary injunction in that suit on 15-11-1984 restraining the, State Government from relieving him from the post of Block Development Officer at Udaipura and directing the State Government to allow him to continue as the Block Development Officer. After the State Government entered appearance in the suit and filed its objections to the order of temporary injunction, the Civil Judge vacated the order of temporary injunction by his order dated 15-3-1985. Thereafter the 1st respondent filed a writ petition on the file of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur requesting the High Court to quash the order of repatriation in Miscellaneous Petition No. 742 of 1985. After the writ petition was admitted and a stay order was issued the 1st respondent withdrew. the suit filed by him before the Civil Judge, Udaipura. Thereafter the High Court heard all the parties and passed an order dated 2-9-1986 quashing the order of repatriation dated 29-6-84 sending back the 1St respondent to his parent department. and directed the State Government to retain him as officiating Block Development Officer on deputation in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department so long as persons junior to the 1st respondent were retained as Block Development Officers and there existed a vacancy. The High Court also quashed the order of the State Government dated 20-5-1985 directing the 1st respondent to vacate the Government quarters which had been occupied by him and also the order of suspension which had been passed in the meanwhile. The High Court also directed the State Government to pay all the salary due to the 1st respondent as Block Development Officer. Aggrieved by the order of the High Court the State Government along with its officers against whom orders were made by the High Court has filed this appeal by special leave. In the writ petition two principal contentions were urged on behalf of the 1St respondent (i) that the order of repatriation was contrary to Rule 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), and (ii) the order of repatriation was arbitrary and was the result of bias and mala fide attitude on the part of Smt. Nirmala Buch, Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department. The High Court held that the order of repatriation had been passed in violation of Rule 14 of the Rules and that although there was no material on record to support the allegation of any bias and mala fides on the part of Smt. Nirmala Buch the order of repatriation was the result of certain "wrong complaints" made by one Panbai who was a Member of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
(3.) RULE 14 of the RULEs is as follows: "14. Reversion and reappointment :- Permanent Government servants officiating in a higher grade of service may be reverted to the lower grade of service from which they were promoted if there are no vacancies in the former grade of service, and such reversion shall not be construed to be a reduction in rank : Provided that the order in which such reversion shall be made will be the reverse of the order in which officiating promotion was made except when administrative. convenience renders it necessary to revert an officiating Government servant otherwise than in accordance with this proviso : Provided further on the occurrene of a fresh vacancy the reappointment to the higher grade of service shall ordinarily be in order of relative seniority of the reverted Government servant." The above rule deals with the question of reversion of a permanent Government servant from an officiating higher grade of service to the lower grade of service from which he had been promoted. This rule in terms does not apply to a case of deputation from one department to another department. Admittedly the 1St respondent had not been promoted from the post of Panchayat and Social Education Organiser which he held in the parent department to a higher post in the said department. He had been, in fact, posted on deputation as officiating Block Development Officer in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department. The High Court was, therefore, in error in holding that the impugned order of repatriation had been passed in violation of Rule 14 of the Rules.;