Dr. Bal Raj Deshwal vs State of Haryana and Others

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.—The petitioner joined the service of All India Jat Heroes Memorial College, Rohtak as lecturer in Chemistry. The said college is part of thirteen educational institutions run by the Jat Education Society, Rohtak including Matu Ram Institute of Engineering and Management, Rohtak. Vide order dated 10.8.2009, the Government conveyed its no objection in case the petitioner was sent on deputation from All India Jat Heroes Memorial College, Rohtak to Matu Ram Institute of Engineering and Management, Rohtak, as both the colleges are managed by the same society. The Government had also laid following terms and conditions for the deputation:--

The lecturer shall claim the salary and all allowances during the deputation period from Matu Ram Institute [claim the salary and all allowances during the deputation period from Matu Ram Institute (repeat)] of Engineering and Management, Rohtak.

The Govt. shall not give any grant-in-aid towards salary and pension contribution of the lecturer during the period of deputation.

The management shall have to bear the salary of the substitute if any is employed in the place of Dr. Balraj Deshwal during his stay at Matu Ram Institute of Engineering and Management, Rohtak on deputation.

The lecturer shall not claim any benefits of increments etc after joining the parent institute.

The society shall decide the terms and conditions of the said period on its own level vis-�-vis their institute.

On 12.8.2009, the society appointed the petitioner as Director, MRIEM for a period of three years on deputation basis. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the petitioner was relieved w.e.f. 13.8.2009 and was further asked to join his duties as Director, MRIEM, Rohtak. Petitioner, thereafter, joined at the new place of posting.

2A. Thereafter, petitioner made a representation to the respondents that his deputation with conditional order with regard to his service conditions be modified, however, no action was taken. Petitioner sent letters dated 25.8.2010, 9.11.2010 and 17.1.2011 to raise his grievances. It is the further case of the petitioner that on 28.1.2011, vide Annexure P-9, the Higher Education Commissioner, Haryana sent a letter to the petitioner, stating that MRIEM, Rohtak is a self-financing institution and service rendered by the petitioner in the said institution cannot be counted for the purpose of increment and pensionary benefits.

Challenging the aforesaid orders dated 10.8.2009, 12.8.2009 and 28.1.2011, counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that neither the petitioner made any request nor has given his consent for deputation and he was forcibly relieved by his parent department and thus, the impugned orders, whereby his service conditions have been altered, adversely affecting his career, are liable to be set aside. It is the further case of the petitioner that the terms and conditions, as enumerated in the order dated 10.8.2009, were neither communicated to the petitioner at the time of his deputation nor the same were part of the deputation order (Annexure P-3) and therefore, the service rendered by the petitioner in the said institution should be counted for the purpose of service benefits including the increment and pensionary benefits, as admissible.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the averments made in this petition along with the documents placed on record.

At the outset, it may be mentioned that the argument raised on behalf of the petitioner, to the effect that the service conditions, as per Annexure P-2, while granting the permission for deputation were neither communicated to him nor he had given consent for the same, is liable to be rejected outrightly. The order dated 10.8.2009 (Annexure P-2) has specifically enumerated the terms and conditions on which the deputation of the petitioner was allowed. The reference to said order finds mention in the order dated 22.8.2009 (Annexure P-3) also, whereby the governing body of the All India Jat Heroes Memorial College, Rohtak and Jat Education Society, Rohtak ordered the appointment of the petitioner as Director of Matu Ram Institute of Engineering and Management, Rohtak, on deputation, for a period of three years. The said order was, admittedly, received by the petitioner. Thus, it cannot be said that the petitioner was not in the knowledge of the terms and conditions of the deputation order. Moreover, the petitioner, as per his own showing, made a representation to the respondent-management, vide letter dated 27.3.2010 (Annexure P-5), yet he had failed to challenge the aforesaid order of sending him on deputation thereafter. He has approached this Court at the fag end of his deputation period (i.e. just 20 days earlier to the expiry of his tenure). Having availed the benefit of deputation, now the petitioner cannot be allowed to challenge the deputation order on the ground that the terms and conditions were not favourable to him. It may also be seen that no exception can be taken to the order dated 28.1.2011, Annexure P-9, whereby the respondent-State had informed the petitioner that the respondent-College is a self-financing institution and the service rendered in the said institution shall not be counted towards pensionary benefits. It may also be noticed that in Annexure P-2, it has been further mentioned that the Jat Education Society shall decide the terms and conditions of the deputation period on its own level vis-�-vis their institute.

In view of the aforesaid express terms and conditions, which are part of the deputation order and which were well in the knowledge of the petitioner, as observed in the foregoing paragraphs, this Court finds no merit in the arguments raised before this Court. Dismissed.