AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J
The grievance of the petitioner is that before being repatriated to his parent department, he was not issued notice in advance as provided for in the instructions dated 20th February, 1999, which read as under:-
"9. Premature Reversion of the Deputationist to Parent Cadre.
Normally, when an employee is appointed on deputation/foreign service, his services are placed at the disposal of the parent Ministry/Department at the end of the tenure. However, as and when a situation arises for premature reversion to the parent cadre of the deputationist, his services could be so returned after giving advance intimation of reasonable period of the lending Ministry/Department and the employee concerned."
The respondents do not dispute this position and state that in fact the order of transfer qua the petitioner has been put on hold and he has been issued a notice in terms of the aforesaid provisions calling for his reply within fifteen days. Once it is so, the instant petition has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to take all the defences and question the show cause notice, including the one that show cause notice itself is an afterthought. Since the petitioner cannot be transferred without his consent, operation of the transfer order qua the petitioner is ordered to be stayed till the decision is taken by the respondents on the reply to the show cause notice to be submitted by the petitioner.
The petition is disposed of alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Authenticated copy be supplied to learned counsel for the parties through the Secretary/Private Secretary.