S P S YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application, the applicant, who belongs to Indian Police Service, has challenged his repatriation to his parent cadre viz. Government of Maharashtra, from the post of Chief Vigilance Officer of Air India Limited at Mumbai, a Public Sector Undertaking owned and controlled by the Government of India.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed on deputation as Chief Vigilance Officer of Air India Limited, Mumbai by letter dated 29.11.2000. On 13.2.2001, the Government of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation, issued another letter in respect of terms and conditions for appointment on deputation. By said letter the term of deputation provided was that initially it is for a period of three years from the date of assumption of charge i.e. 8.12.2000 (FN) or until further orders whichever is earlier. Though the appointment of the applicant was for a period of three years but by letter dated 20.6.2002, the Ministry of Civil Aviation directed his premature repatriation and the applicant stood relieved on 21.6.2002. Aggrieved by the order of repatriation, the applicant is before us. He has challenged the repatriation order mainly on two grounds firstly on the ground of competency of authority ordering repatriation and secondly on the ground of malice.

(3.) THE arguments advanced by applicant, who appeared in person, give rise to two questions. THE two questions which arise for consideration are as to whether the applicant has been repatriated prematurely by Competent Authority in accordance with law and whether premature repatriation of the applicant is vititated due to malice.