BINAY KUMAR Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant was working as Director (Personnel) in Power Grid Corporation of India and was suspended on 1.10.1999. He challenged this in CWP 6301/1999 which was dismissed by order dated 21.1.2000. His suspension was later revoked pursuant to some negotiations and on his agreeing to be transferred to NHPC. He was put on compulsory waiting for this which he challenged in CW No.4654/2000 but which was dismissed on 9.4.2001 as infructuous after he expressed his willingness to be so transferred. He was again put on compulsory waiting which he again challenged in CWP 3536/2001 and which was dismissed by order dated 11.5.2001. He took appeal against this in LPA 295/2001 which was disposed of by a consent order of sorts dated 1.6.2001. In this he expressed his willingness to be transferred to NHPC and so did R-1 agree to recall his fresh suspension order. Pursuant to this order his suspension was revoked and his case for transfer to NHPC processed culminating in order dated 7.8.2001 whereby he was ordered to interchange place with one Sh.A.I.Bunet, Director (Personnel) NHPC, for the balance period of the respective tenure of the two officers. He acted upon this order and joined NHPC on 9.8.2001. After he had worked there for more than one year there, he again filed yet other CWP 6479/2002 to challenge this order dated 7.8.2001 on the plea that R-1 had used the word "interchange" in place of "transfer" to deprive him of a fresh tenure of five years from the date of his joining in NHPC in terms of OM dated 17.9.1975. The writ court over-ruled his plea on taking the view that the OM in question was not applicable to his case and that his shifting to NHPC was governed by provision of order dated 7.8.2001. Hence this appeal.

(2.) Appellant in a repeat exercise again contends that his shifting to NHPC was to be a transfer covered by provisions of OM dated 17.9.1975 which would guarantee him a 5 year tenure in NHPC. According to his counsel R-1 had all along processed his case for transfer to NHPC under this OM. So much so that even order dated 1.6.2001 of this court passed in his LPA 295/2001 provided for his transfer and consequently he could not be asked to interchange place which was substituted last minute for "transfer" to flout the terms of this OM and to deprive him of its benefit of enjoying a 5-year tenure at NHPC. She also invited our attention to order dated 9.8.2000 to suggest that he was selected for transfer with the concurrence of Public Enterprises Selection Board also and that these terms could not be later varied to his detriment.

(3.) All that falls for consideration is whether respondent's shifting to NHPC was covered by terms of OM of 1975 and whether he could enjoy a 5-year tenure from the date of joining in the NHPC under this even though his original tenure in the Power Grid Corporation was to expire earlier on 7.7.2003. This in our view, is the crux of the matter.