- (1.) The petitioner was initially appointed as a Panchayat Secretary in the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat, State of Punjab on 08.04.1980. Thereafter, he was appointed as a Child Development Project Officer in the Department of Social Security, Women & Child Development, Punjab on 06.01.1999 by way of direct recruitment. In terms of order dated 14.09.2001, the petitioner was taken on deputation in the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat on the post of Block Development & Panchayat Officer against a post meant for direct recruitment for a period of one year subject to further extension from time to time. Petitioner while on deputation on the post of Block Development & Panchayat Officer was granted extensions from time to time and finally vide order dated 16.04.2007, he was ordered to be repatriated back to his parent department. The petitioner preferred CWP No.6346 of 2007 impugning the order of repatriation dated 16.04.2007 terming the same to be unjust and arbitrary and the same having been passed without affording him any opportunity of hearing. CWP No.6346 of 2007 was disposed of by this Court on 25.08.2008 in terms of directing the respondent/authorities to decide the legal notice dated 14.2.2008 that the petitioner had already served upon the respondent/authorities. In deference to the order passed by this Court, respondent No.1 has passed order dated 27.11.2008, whereby, the legal notice preferred by the petitioner has been filed and the order of repatriation to his parent department has been upheld.
(2.) It is against such factual background that the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugning the order of repatriation dated 16.04.2007 (Annexure P-8) as also the order dated 27.11.2008 (Annexure P-11) whereby, the legal notice has been decided against the petitioner and the order of repatriation of the petitioner to his parent department has been upheld. Further challenge in the present writ petition has been laid to the condition contained in the deputation order dated 12.09.2001, wherein, it had been stipulated that the petitioner would have no right to claim absorption permanently in the department of Rural Development & Panchayat.
(3.) I have heard Mr. Puneet Bali, Senior Advocate with Ms. Priyanka Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Suveer Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents.;