Rajan Roy, J. - (1.) By means of this Writ Petition the petitioner has challenged the curtailment of his deputation and his repatriation by the Unique Identification Authority of India (herein after referred as UIDAI) to his parent corporation namely Metals and Minerals Trading Corporation, Jaipur (herein after referred as MMTC). The petitioner has challenged two orders, one dated 16.03.2020 which is the notice of his repatriation and by an amendment in the writ petition another order dated 28.05.2020 passed by the Chief Executive Officer of UIDAI rejecting the petitioner's representation against the order dated 16.03.2020 has also been challenged.
(2.) The petitioner is an employee of MMTC, Jaipur. In pursuance to office memorandum dated 10.10.2013 inviting applications from eligible persons for filling up various posts including that of Deputy Director in the UIDAI on deputation basis at its regional office, Lucknow, the petitioner also applied and was selected for such deputation. He was appointed on deputation, consequent to his selection, as Deputy Director at the regional office of UIDAI, Lucknow vide a order dated 05.02.2014 for a period of 3 years from the date of taking over charge of the post or until further orders, whichever event takes place earlier. The terms and conditions of deputation during his tenure of deputation in UIDAI were to be governed by the Department of Personnel and Training (herein after referred as DoPT) OM dated17.06.2010 and this fact was mentioned in the order of deputation dated 05.02.2014 as also the OM dated 10.10.2013. In pursuance to the aforesaid, the petitioner joined at the regional office, Lucknow in 2014 itself. The deputation period was extended sometime in 2017/2018. In August, 2019 the opposite party no. 2 sought explanation from the petitioner regarding his day to day work and the reasons for non submission of reports on time. The petitioner submitted a written reply on 30.08.2019, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-10 to supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner. The reply of the petitioner was not found to be satisfactory and a comment was recorded by the opposite party no. 2 who was the head of the regional office at Lucknow to the effect- "not so much that reports will not go on time. The explanation not acceptable."
(3.) Be that as it may, on 21.01.2020, the Unique Identification Authority of India (appointment of officers and employees) Regulations, 2020 framed under Section 21 (1) read with Sub-section 1 of Section 54 and Clause (x) of Sub-section 2 of Section 54 of the Adhaar (Targeted delivery of Financial and other subsidies, benefits and services) Act, 2016 (herein after referred as Act, 2016) , as amended vide the Adhaar and other laws (Amendment) Act, 2019 (herein after referred as Act, 2019), were notified.;