UNION OF INDIA Vs. SUSHANTA KUMAR BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.8.2001 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati in O.A. No. 227/2000 allowing the said application and setting aside the orders dated 9.4.1999 and 11.8.2000, both passed by the Chief Conservator of Forests (Central), petitioner No. 2 herein and by directing the petitioners No. 1 and 2 to refix the inter-se-seniority of the applicant (respondent No. 1 herein) vis-a-vis the petitioners No. 3 and 4, the respondents No. 2 and 3 in Original Application, by holding that the past services rendered by the original applicant in the parent Department is to be counted for the purpose of fixing the seniority in the borrowing Department after he was permanently absorbed in the said Department.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is that the respondent No. 1 herein, who was initially appointed as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) with effect from 16.1.1986 in the North Eastern Police Academy, Barapani, under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India was sent on deputation as LDC with effect from 15.6.1989 in terms of the offer of appointment dated 11.5.1989 in the office of the Chief Conservator of Forests (Central), Regional Office, Shillong, Government of India, which was accepted by the respondent No. 1 herein. The respondent No. 1 herein accordingly joined the said post of LDC on deputation in the said office under the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India on 15.6.1989. Though the initial period of deputation was for three years, the said period was extended from time to time totalling for a period of five years, during which period, he was even officiated as Upper Division Clerk (UDC). The respondent No. 1 (original applicant) in due course of time requested for permanent absorption in the borrowing Department and though the parent Department initially issued a 'No Objection' for his permanent absorption in the borrowing Department, subsequently, they vide communication dated 11.11.1993 requested the borrowing Department to repatriate him on expiry of the deputation period on 14.6.1994. The respondent No. 1, thereafter, moved the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 43/1994, which was disposed of vide order dated 3.10.1994 leaving it to the respondents therein to sympathetically consider his request for permanent absorption. The parent Department, namely, North Eastern Police Academy, thereafter issued a no-objection certificate for permanent absorption of the respondent No. 1 herein in the borrowing Department vide Memo dated 29.12.1994 in response to the letter of the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Ministry of Environment and Forests dated 1.12.1994. The parent Department, thereafter, vide order dated 13.5.1995 directed the respondent No. 1 to report to his parent Department immediately, which was assailed by him by filing another O.A. being O.A. No. 68/95 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati wherein vide interim order dated 22.2.1995, the learned Tribunal left it open to the applicant (Respondent No. 2 herein) to join his parent Department without prejudice to his claim for absorption in the borrowing Department. The said OA came to be disposed of vide judgment and order dated 18.10.1995 directing the respondents therein to consider the case of the applicant for absorption in the borrowing Department permanently in the light of the discussion made in the said judgment. The respondents in the said O.A.vide Misc. Case No. 22/1996 filed before the learned Tribunal sought for extension of time for compliance of the said judgment and order dated 18.10.1995 which was allowed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 22.2.1996 extending time for compliance of the said order. The Deputy Conservator of Forests (C), Ministry of Environment and Forests, i.e. the borrowing Department vide office order dated 20.3.1996 permanently absorbed the original applicant (Respondent No. 1 herein) against the vacant post of LDC in the Regional Office at Shillong with effect from the date of issuance of the said order which was, however, been modified vide order dated 17.4.1996 to the effect that the order of permanent absorption would be operated from the date of joining his duty. The respondent No. 1 again moved the learned Tribunal assailing the prospective absorption in the parent Department in O.A. No.128/96 which was disposed of vide order dated 21.1.1999 directing the respondents therein, i.e. the borrowing Department to consider the case of the applicant for permanent absorption with retrospective effect. The Chief Conservator of Forests (Central), on the basis of the direction issued by the learned Tribunal in the said order dated 21.1.1999, vide order dated 9.4.1999 held that the order of absorption of the original applicant (respondent No.1 herein) was to be determined with effect from 13.2. 1995 i.e. the date on which the repatriation to the parent department was passed by the borrowing Department, on the wound that the original applicant was absorbed in the borrowing Department not in public interest but as per his own request and, therefore, his past service in the parent Department cannot be counted for the purpose of determining the seniority in the borrowing Department after absorption in view of the office memorandum dated 29.5.1986 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions. However, taking the date of absorption as 13.2.1995 i.e. the date when the order of repatriation was passed by the borrowing Department, the original applicant's seniority was fixed below the writ petitioner No. 3 and above the writ petitioner No. 4. The original applicant being aggrieved filed an appeal against the said decision. Another appeal was also preferred by the writ petitioner No. 4 herein, which was disposed of by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India and communicated by the Chief Conservator of Forests (Central) vide memorandum dated 11.8.2000, holding that the applicant's seniority has to be fixed after both the present writ petitioner No. 3 and 4 and on the basis of his date of absorption i.e. from 3.4.1996. Both the said orders were challenged in O.A.No. 227/2000 before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati, which was disposed of, vide order dated 22.8.2001. Hence, the present writ petition filed by the Union of India as well as the Chief Conservator of Forests, Ministry of Environment and Forests and Smt. J. Lyngkhoi and Shri M.P. Rimal who were respondents in the said O.A. It will not to be out of place to mention herein that though the writ petition has been filed by arraying Smt. J. Lyngkhoi and Shri M.P. Rimal, over whom the original applicant claims seniority, no power has been filed by the learned Central Government counsel in preferring the present writ petition alongwith the Union of India as well as the Chief Conservator of Forests.

(3.) We have heard Mr. DC Chakraborty, learned Central Government Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners and also Mr. K. Paul, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 who was original applicant before the learned Tribunal.