D.V.Sehgal, J. - (1.) THE Petitioner claims himself to be the senior -most Additional Registrar in the Co -operative Department, Haryana. He was sent on deputation to the Government of India as Private Secretary to the Union Minister of Agriculture, New Delhi in the year 1981. Vide letter dated 2nd February, 1984 (Annexure P.1), he was selected to the post of Zonal Manager to work on deputation with the Indian Farmers Fertilizers Co -operative Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the IFFCO') for a period of 2 years. Vide order dated 18th April, 1984 (Annexure P.2), he was recalled from deputation from the Government of India and was placed on deputation with the IFFCO for appointment as Zonal Manager (North) at Chandigarh. Vide order dated 27th April, 1985 (Annexure P.3), the State of Haryana Respondent No. 1, recalled him from the IFFCO and posted him as Chief Auditor, Co -operative Societies, Haryana, Chandigarh, against a leave vacancy, on which post he is working at present. Again, - -vide order dated 3rd August 1985 (Annexure P.4), he has been posted on deputation as Additional Managing Director with the Haryana State Co -operative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the HAFED'). He submitted an application dated 12th August, 1985 (Annexure P.5) to Respondent No. 1, representing against his being sent on deputation to the HAFED. He relied on the instructions of the Finance Department, dated 11th May, 1977 extracted in Annexure P.6, and contended that, on return from the earlier deputation he has not yet completed two years in the parent Department and, therefore, could not be sent on deputation. He further contended that he could not be sent on deputation against his will. However, - -vide order dated 9th September 1985 (Annexure P.7), he was directed to relinquish the charge, of the post of Chief Auditor and assume charge of the post of Additional Managing Director with the HAFED in compliance with the order dated 3rd August, 1985 (Annexure P.4). Aggrieved by the orders, Annexures P.4 and P.7, he has filed the present writ petition challenging the aforesaid orders, more or less, on the basis of the contention which he raised in his application Annexure P.6.
(2.) THE writ petition came up for motion hearing on 12th September 1985 before a Division Bench. While issuing notice of motion, operation of the impugned order Annexure P.4, to the extent it affected the Petitioner, was stayed. Written statement has been filed on behalf of Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. In defence, it is contended that the instructions of the Finance Department (Annexure P.6) are administrative in nature. It is further asserted that the HAFED is an incorporated body which is wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the Government. Therefore in view of the proviso to Rule 10.2(a) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume I (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), the Petitioner could be sent on deputation to HAFED as Additional Managing Director even against his will.
(3.) IN my view the instructions of the Finance Department (Annexure P.6) being administrative in nature, have no legal and binding force and, as such, the Petitioner cannot take support from the same. It is, however, necessary to delve upon the second contention with a little elaboration. Rule 10.2 (a) with proviso thereto of the Rules is as under: No Government employee may be transferred to foreign service against his will: Provided that this sub -rule shall not apply to the transfer of a Government employee to the service of a body, incorporated or not, which is wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the Government.;