IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Amit Bansal, JJ.
Union Of India - Appellant
Versus
Shailja Saxena - Respondent
W.P.(C) No. 4731 of 2017, 3809 of 2018, 4830 of 2017, 9348 of 2018
Decided On : 02-03-2021
CHS Rules - Absorption of Deputationists - Rule 8 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the Central Health Service Rules 1996, specifically Rule 8, and its subsequent amendments in 2001 and 2006. The amendments allowed for the absorption of deputationists in the General Duty Medical sub-cadre posts of CHS. The court also referred to the Full Bench of CAT's order dated 22nd April, 2009, and the Supreme Court's decision in Sub-Inspector Rooplal Vs. Lt. Governor, Delhi, (2000) 1 SCC 644, and Mrigank Johri Vs. Union of India, (2017) 8 SCC 256, in reaching its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents, who were deputationists in the General Duty subcadre of the Central Health Services (CHS), sought the counting of their past service as qualifying service for promotions post-absorption in the CHS. The petitioners contested this, citing the CHS Rules and the terms of absorption of the respondents.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents were absorbed as direct recruits in the CHS, and their past service in their parent cadre could not be counted for the purposes of qualifying service for promotion in CHS. The court also dismissed the respondents' claims for out-of-turn promotions and benefits based on their past service.
Issues: The main issue was whether the past service of the respondents in their parent cadre should be counted as qualifying service for promotions in the CHS.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absorption of the respondents was as direct recruits in the CHS, and their past service in their parent cadre could not be counted for the purposes of qualifying service for promotion in CHS. The court also emphasized that the rights claimed by the respondents were to the prejudice of direct recruits through examination in the GDMO sub-cadre of CHS.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitions and dismissed the respondents' claims for counting past service as qualifying service for promotions in the CHS.
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. - All the four petitions though impugn the separate orders of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi in separate OAs preferred by each of the respondent, all now in the General Duty subcadre of the Central Health Services (CHS), but each order directs the petitioner Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Union of India, to count the past service of each of the respondent as qualifying service for the purposes of promotions, post absorption in the CHS.
2. The petitions were entertained and notice thereof ordered to be issued.
3. We have heard the counsels for the petitioners and the counsels for the respondents.
4. The Central Health Service Rules 1996, in Rule 3 provide for composition of service, in Rule 4, the authorised strength of service, in Rule 5, the members of the service, in Rule 6, the initial constitution of the service and in Rule 7, for the filling up of future vacancies in the service. Rule 7 refers to Schedule II and III to the Rules and which inter alia provide for method of recruitment, the field of selection for promotion including the minimum qualifying service in the immediate lower grade or grades for appointment or promotion to the posts in the respective sub-cadre and specialties within the sub-cadre concerned included in the service. In Schedule III, the method of recruitment, in the General Duty sub-cadre posts of Medical Officer is by direct recruitment on the basis of a written examination and the method of recruitment of the next higher posts of Senior Medical Officer, Chief Medical Officer and Chief Medical Officer (Non-Functional Selection Grade) is by promotion from the immediately lower cadre post, with the prescribed qualifying service. Thereafter, Rule 8 provides as under:
"8. Filling of Duty Posts by Transfer on Deputation (including short term contract):
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in rule 7, where the Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may for reasons to be recorded in writing and in consultation with the Commission, fill not more than twenty duty posts in all, in the grades of Medical Officer/Senior Medical Officer in General Duty Sub-Cadre and Specialist Grade II (Junior Scale) in the Non-Teaching Specialist SubCadre and Public Health Sub-Cadre by transfer on deputation of suitable officers holding analogous posts under the Central Government (including Ministries of Railways and Defence)/State Governments/Union Territories and by Short Term Contract of suitable-officers holding analogous posts under the statutory bodies, autonomous bodies, semigovernment organisations, universities or recognised Research Institutions.
(2) The period of deputation/contract shall be for a period not exceeding three years, which may, in special circumstances be extended upto five years, as the Government may think fit."
The aforesaid Rule, though provides for appointment by transfer/deputation, to the General Duty Medical sub-cadre posts, inter alia from State Governments but only for a maximum period of five years and does not provide for absorption of deputationists in the General Duty Medical sub-cadre posts of CHS, which could only be by direct recruitment.
5. However vide Central Health Service (Amendment Rules), 2001, notified on 30th July, 2001, in place of Rule 8 aforesaid, the following rule was substituted:
"8. Filling of duty posts by deputation (including short term contract)/absorption:
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the rule 7, where the Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may for the reasons to be recorded in writing and in consultation with the Commission, fill not more than one hundred duty posts in all, in the grades of Medical Officer or Senior Medical Officer or Chief Medical Officer in the General Duty Medical Officer sub cadre and Specialist Grade II (Junior and Senior Scale) or Specialist Grade I in the NonTeaching and Public Health
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the absorption of deputationists in the CHS was as direct recruits, and their past service in their parent cadre could not be counted for the ....
The court held that past service in a different cadre cannot be counted as qualifying service for promotions in the Central Health Services, emphasizing adherence to the stipulated rules.
A deputationist has no vested right to permanent absorption unless expressly provided by statutory rules or regulations in force.
No indefeasible right to absorption in deputation office for officer on personal request deputation across distinct cadres; Child Care Leave extension subject to service needs; headquarters posting o....
Long administrative delays in fulfilling promotional rights constitute contempt of tribunal orders, necessitating a structured path for promotions.
The court upheld that without clear statutory provisions allowing absorption, deputationists retain no right to permanent positions, reaffirming previous rulings.
Promotion eligibility requires continuous service without gaps; prior service on deputation does not count if repatriated before direct recruitment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.