AMIR CHAND KAKKAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE moot point which arises for consideration and determination in the present O.A. is--Whether an employee whose lien in the parent department stood terminated on account of his permanent absorption in the Department to which he has gone on deputation can be repatriated to the parent department to the serious detriment of an employee who has acquired a vested right on the promotional post in the parent department?

(2.) This controversy has come up before us in the background of the following admitted facts.

(3.) THE whole trouble shot up on account of the fact that the competent authority in the Government of India, Department of Agriculture and Co-operation found that the permanent absorption granted to Shri Sharma by NBDC was irregular. Consequently by order dated 30.10.2000, Annexure A-3, issued by NBDC, Shri Sharma was to stand relieved in the afternoon of 31.10.2000, on being repatriated to his parent organization with immediate effect. Since Shri Sharma did not have a lien on any post in TTI, he could not be allowed to join. Finding himself in a quandary, Shri Sharma approached the Principal Bench of this Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 2435 of 2000 in which an interim order was passed on 22.11.2000, Annexure A-13, whereby operation of the orders dated 30-31.10.2000 passed by NBDC was stayed and it was directed that NBDC shall allow Shri Sharma to continue and function in the post held by him. During the pendency of the said O.A. the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, issued a letter dated 5th December, 2000, Annexure A-2, addressed to Director, TTI, with the advice: