ALOK SHARMA, J - (1.) Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the respondents and perused the reply to the petition.
(2.) The appointment by deputation of the petitioners as Additional Chief Block Education Officers in different blocks of District Bharatpur vide order dated 5.10.2018 under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) apparently was non-compliant with the business rules framed on 8.8.2016 under Article 166 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as neither the approval of the Secretary of the Administrating Department i.e. Department of Education nor of the concerned Minister as mandated, was taken. Besides it has also transpired that the petitioners were appointed by deputation vide order dated 5.10.2018 in haste following the purported walk-in-interview held on 3/4/5.10.2018 immediately prior to the code of conduct for elections to the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly being notified on 6.10.2018. It is also admitted that illegality aforesaid being noticed, following the advertisement dated 18.2.2019 for making appointments by deputation afresh to the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan the petitioners participated in the interviews held between 22.2.2019 to 24.2.2019 albeit they filed this petition on 21.2.2019.
(3.) Reliance placed by counsel for the petitioners on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Ratilal Patel vs. Union of India & Another Civil Appeal No .5225/2012 decided on 16.7.2012 is of little avail in the facts of the case. Indeed in the aforesaid judgment the Apex Court has neatly differentiated between appointment by way of deputation and transfer on deputation, and held that where deputation was by way of appointment it had to abide by its terms including as to the tenure. But the case at hand turns on the illegality in the appointments by deputation. Such illegality cannot be saved by the law enunciated in Ashok Kumar Ratilal Patel vs. Union of India & Another (supra). Reliance placed by counsel for the petitioners on Rule 144-A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, on the Government note, which provides for one year deputations extendable upto three years, to submit that the petitioner's appointed by way of deputation for one year vide order dated 5.10.2018 cannot be revoked, is again of little avail. This also for the reason recorded above that the petitioners' appointment by way of deputation on the post of Additional Chief Block Education Officers with the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan was wholly illegal as it was in plain contravention of the mandate of business rules notified on 6.10.2018 under Article 166 of the Constitution of India.;