REINSTATEMENT OR FULL SALARY
FOR THE BALANCE PERIOD IS ADMISSIBLE FOR PREMATURE REPATRIATION FROM DEPUTATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH A SUPREME COURT DECISION.
The respondent was working as a Scientist E-II in the Central Mining
Research Institute. On 29.07.2003, he was appointed for 5 years on deputation
to the post of Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (‘CGPDTM’).
After serving there for one year, he was repatriated to his parent department.
The said order was challenged before the central administrative tribunal contending
that he could not have been pre-maturely repatriated to his parent department
and there had been a violation of the principle of audi altram partem. The said
stand of the 1st respondent was contested by the authorities of Union of India proponing
that he had no right to continue in the post as he was on deputation. The
tribunal accepted the stance put forth by the Union of India and dismissed the
Original Application. Then the 1st respondent invoked the jurisdiction of the High
Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The Division
Bench of the High Court has overturned the order passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal and directed that the writ petitioner to be reinstated
in the post of CGPDTM on similar terms and conditions with all consequential
benefits. Then
the Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court.
In
the appeal, the Supreme Court of the considered view that there should not be
any loss of salary, but at the same time, S.C. was of the view that, if they direct for his reinstatement as
the High Court had done, it would create an anomalous situation. Therefore,
in their considered view, the cause of justice would be best subserved, if he was
allowed to get the entire salary that was payable to him for the post of CGPDTM
for the balance period of five years minus the period he had actually served
and drawn salary. Therefore, the Supreme Court directed the Appellants to pay
the balance amount with interest @ 9% p.a. within three months.
(Reference: THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
decision in Union of India & Anr. ... Appellants V/S S.N.
Maity & Anr. ...Respondents in CIVIL APPEAL NO.5983 OF 2007 decided on January
06, 2015)
No comments:
New comments are not allowed.