news details |
|
|
| State reserves right to repatriate employees to parent deptts: HC | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 02: A High Court division bench of Justice Muzaffar Hussain Attar and Justice B S Walia today ruled that the state "reserves the right to repatriate its employees to their parent departments during any course of time".
The court judgement came in a petition filed by Pawan Nehru who was in revenue department and had been deputed to the relief and rehabilitation department in the beginning of this year for effectively carrying out the relief and rehabilitation operations for the Kashmiri migrants.
The petitioner's counsel submitted that vide its June 24, 2014 order No Rev/MR/150/2014, the government had framed a transfer policy for the employees posted in relief organisation and the transfer of petitioner was in violation of this order itself wherein it "is clearly mentioned that an employee irrespective of status shall be repatriated to his parent department who has stayed in the relief organization for more than 10 years and submitted that according to the government's own ruling, no official shall be allowed to continuously work in the relief organization beyond five years and the employees who have already completed the mentioned period may be dealt with this transfer policy, whereas in the present case it is a clear cut breach of trust with the employees and their transfer is purely pre-mature which has happened before the mentioned period".
The AAG apprised the court that since the establishment of the relief organization, it had remained a precedent to take the working hands from other departments of the state on deputation basis and in this case too, the employees were on deputation basis and not on the existing posts. He submitted that although both the terms 'transfer' and 'deputation' are synonymous but when an employee is sent on deputation he is sent out of his cadre on assignment to some other department but the transfer remains limited within the department possessing the same nature of work technically can be termed as an internal adjustment and further submitted that an employee may not have any right to continue remain posted outside his cadre for the period fixed in the order of the deputation as in the interest of the smooth functioning of the administration one can be repatriated at any time to his parent department. He argued that when the assigned work gets finished, there remains no fun to keep the employee in the organization as it is like mismanaging the government functioning and if after the completion of the assignment the deputed employee is sent back to his original department it will serve the working of the parent department which, somehow, got defunct because of that particular deputation.
He also apprised the court that although the maximum fixed time period is of five years but there is no mention of minimum time period and if the department feels that there is no further requirement of the employee, it should be authorised to send him back to the original department.
The bench, after going through the arguments of the two sides, found the appeal meritless and dismissed it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
