Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Jyoti Singh, J.
Nasreen Bano Siddiqui – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 5751 of 2022 & CM APPL. 17195 of 2022
Decided On : 02-05-2023
DPC - Absorption of Employees on Appointment on Deputation - Rule 10 of 2020 Rules - Summary of Acts and Sections: Rule 10 of 2020 Rules, Rule 7 of 2020 Rules - The court discussed the provisions of Rule 10 of 2020 Rules, which provides for absorption on deputation as a mode of appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar, NCLT, with the approval of Central Government mandated under Rule 7 of the said Rules. The court highlighted the legal principles governing deputation and absorption, and the authority of the Executive in making decisions regarding recruitment and mode of appointment.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner, an Assistant Employment Officer, applied for deputation to the post of Assistant Registrar in NCLT and opted for permanent absorption. The process of permanent absorption was initiated, but the Petitioner was relieved from NCLT before the process was finalized. The Petitioner sought a direction to convene a DPC and finalize the absorption process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Petitioner's relief was not justified as the decision to terminate the process of permanent absorption and resort to deputation as a mode of appointment was within the framework of the Rules. The court held that the Petitioner cannot seek a writ of mandamus to convene a DPC for consideration of her case on permanent absorption in NCLT.
Issues: The issues involved the Petitioner's right to insist on the completion of the permanent absorption process and the authority of the Executive in making decisions regarding recruitment and mode of appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Petitioner did not have a vested right to insist on the completion of the permanent absorption process and that the decision to terminate the process and resort to deputation was within the framework of the Rules. The court also highlighted the authority of the Executive in making decisions regarding recruitment and mode of appointment.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as the court found it devoid of merit.
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J.
1. By this writ petition, Petitioner impugns the inaction of the Respondents in not convening and finalizing the Departmental Promotion Committee (`DPC') for selection on absorption to the post of Assistant Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal (`NCLT'), despite inviting options on 21.12.2020, processing the case, obtaining NOC on 28.06.2021 and the Competent Authority nominating the member of DPC on 05.11.2021.
2. Factual score emerging from the writ petition is that Petitioner was appointed as Assistant Employment Officer in the Directorate of Training and Employment, Government of U.P. w.e.f. 28.12.1999. Applications were invited by NCLT vide Office Memorandum dated 16.11.2017 for filling up different posts including post of Assistant Registrar in their set up, on deputation basis. Petitioner applied as she fulfilled all the requisite conditions stipulated in the Notification and was duly selected for appointment on deputation basis vide order dated 05.03.2018, initially for a period of one year from the date of assumption of charge and joined the post w.e.f. 02.04.2018.
3. Thereafter, options were invited by NCLT vide O.M. dated 21.12.2020 for absorption from those officers who were on deputation in NCLT from other Departments and fulfilled the eligibility criteria stipulated in Rule 10 i.e `Absorption of Employees on Appointment on Deputation' of the National Company Law Tribunal (Recruitment, Salary and other Terms and Conditions of Service of Officers and other Employees) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as `2020 Rules'), followed by Corrigendum dated 23.12.2020.
4. Petitioner, who was already working as an Assistant Registrar on deputation basis in NCLT, opted for permanent absorption and at the same time, NCLT processed her case for further extension of deputation for a period of two years i.e. from 02.04.2021 to 01.04.2023 and sought `no objection' from her parent department vide letter dated 08.01.2021. After receiving no objection, deputation period of the Petitioner was extended for one year i.e. 02.04.2021 to 01.04.2022. In furtherance of the process initiated for absorption, the Competent Authority, vide order dated 05.11.2021, nominated Ms. Mithlesh, Adviser (Cost), Ministry of Corporate Affairs, as Member of the DPC for selection on deputation/absorption to the post of Assistant Registrars, NCLT.
5. Petitioner avers that since the process of absorption on deputation was getting unduly prolonged and her tenure on deputation was coming to an end on 01.04.2022, she requested for further extension of deputation till finalization of the process of permanent absorption, vide representation dated 25.03.2022. However, instead of convening and finalizing the DPC, NCLT issued an order dated 01.04.2022, relieving the Petitioner on completion of the deputation tenure and also sanctioned one month `end of tenure' leave, beginning from 04.04.2022 with an assurance that the leave period salary and allowances shall be paid by NCLT. Since there was complete stalemate on the absorption process, Petitioner approached this Court seeking direction to the Respondents to convene a DPC and finalise the absorption process.
6. Contention of the Petitioner is that Rule 10 of 2020 Rules provides absorption on deputation as one of the modes of appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar and stipulates that persons appointed on deputation basis, who fulfil the qualifications and experience laid down in the Rules and are considered suitable by the Department Promotion Committee, shall be eligible for absorption, subject to such person exercising option for absorption and subject to grant of `no objection' from the parent department. Rule 7 further provides that appointments of Officers and other employees of NCLT shall be made by the Appointing Authority, provided that the appointments to the posts in Level-11 or above in Pay Matrix of 7th CPC, shall be made with the approval of Central Government a
The authority of the Executive in making decisions regarding recruitment and mode of appointment, and the absence of a vested right for the Petitioner to insist on the completion of the permanent abs....
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....
The court upheld that without clear statutory provisions allowing absorption, deputationists retain no right to permanent positions, reaffirming previous rulings.
Refusal to grant NOC - Period of Deputation - Petitioners did not fulfill the eligibility condition for absorption and petitioners had no right to claim absorption.
Deputationists lack inherent rights to absorption in borrowing departments unless supported by statutory provisions, necessitating consent from both parent and borrowing entities.
Legitimate expectation for absorption in CBI based on NOC from the parent department and commendable service in CBI justified the court's decision to set aside the Tribunal's order and direct the pet....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the effective date of permanent absorption is determined by the Cabinet approval, and the petitioner's claim for seniority from an earlier dat....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
