SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 389

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Vijay Bishnoi, CJ., N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.
Union Of India And Ors. - Appellant 
VERSUS
Banshidhar Mohapatra S/o Late Trilochan Mohapatra - Respondent 
WP(C)/3589/2023
Decided On : 01-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR. B CHAKRAVARTY,
For the Respondent: MR. S C KEYAL, FOR CAVEATOR

The appointment of an employee from one DRT to another cannot be deemed a promotion if the employee is not considered a departmental candidate under the applicable Recruitment Rules.

Headnote:

(A) Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati, Group “A” and "B"(Gazetted) and Group "B"(Non Gazetted) Post Recruitment Rules, 2001 - The court addressed the issue of whether the appointment of the respondent as Section Officer was to be treated as a promotion or deputation. The Tribunal concluded that the appointment should be treated as a promotion based on the recommendation of the Presiding Officer. However, the court found that the respondent was not a departmental candidate as he was appointed from a different DRT, thus the appointment was on deputation. (Paras 6, 40, 44)

(B) Recruitment Rules - The court emphasized that the provisions of the Recruitment Rules of 2001 and the subsequent 2018 Rules clearly delineate the eligibility criteria for departmental candidates and the nature of appointments. The court ruled that the respondent's appointment was not in accordance with these rules. (Paras 25, 36, 42)

Facts of the case:
The respondent, a regular employee of DRT, Cuttack, was appointed on deputation as Section Officer in DRT, Guwahati. The appointment was contested by the petitioners, who argued it was not a promotion.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the appointment was made on deputation and not promotion, as the respondent was not a departmental candidate.

Issues: The main issues were whether the appointment was to be treated as a promotion or deputation and the interpretation of the Recruitment Rules.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the respondent could not be considered a departmental candidate for the purpose of promotion, as he was from a different DRT.

Result: The order of the Central Administrative Tribunal was set aside, and the original application was dismissed.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.

Heard Mr. Biplav Chakravarty, learned CGC, appearing on behalf of the appellants. Also heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned counsel, along with Ms.N. Kakoti, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the sole respondent.

2. The present writ petition has been instituted by the petitioners, herein, assailing the order, dated 24.04.2023, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal(CAT), Guwahati Bench, in Original Application being O.A. No. 040/00375/2019, along with the Misc. Application No. 040/00055/2022, whereby, the Original Application instituted by the respondent, herein, came to be allowed.

3. The Original Application, referred to above, was instituted by the respondent, herein, before learned Central Administrative Tribunal(CAT), Guwahati Bench, inter alia, praying for the following reliefs:

8.1 That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to declare that the selection and appointment of the applicant to the post of Section Officer is liable to be treated as Promotion instead of Deputation in modification of the appointment order dated 21.02.2017 (Annexure A9) In the light of the statutory provision laid down in the relevant recruitment rules 2001 of DRT Guwahati.

8.2 That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the respondents to treat the appointment of the applicant to the post of section officer w.e.f 20.02.2017 in modification of the appointment letter 09.02.2017 and appointment order No.DRTG/P- 75/2017/126 dated 21.02.2017 In the light of the relevant Statutory Recruitment Rule, 2001 with Immediate effect without any further delay, With further direction to grant all consequential benefit including seniority in the cadre of Section Officer with Immediate effect.

8.3 Costs of the application.

8.4 Any other relief (s) to which the applicants are entitled to as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”

4. As projected in the aforesaid Original Application, the respondent, herein, for the purpose of grant of the reliefs as quoted above, has submitted that he being a departmental candidate, by virtue of being appointed on substantive basis as an Assistant in the Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Cuttack, on his appointment against the post of Section Officer in Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Guwahati, on deputation basis, such appointment was required to be so made in his case in terms of the provisions incorporated in the advertisement published by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Guwahati, in the Employment News, dated 30.05.2015-05.06.2015, by way of promotion with all consequential benefits.

5. The said position was disputed by the petitioners, herein, before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal(CAT), Guwahati Bench, by contending that the appointment of the respondent, herein, against the post of Section Officer in Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Guwahati, was on deputation basis and he being a regular employee of Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Cuttack, he could not be deemed to be a departmental candidate, insofar as, his appointment against the post of Section Officer in Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Guwahati, is concerned, in-as-much as, the Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Cuttack, and Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Guwahati, were separate establishments in terms of the provisions of the Recruitment Rules holding the field at the relevant point of time.

6. The learned Central Administrative Tribunal(CAT), Guwahati Bench, upon consideration of the issue arising before it and after hearing the learned counsels appearing for the parties, was pleased to dispose of the Original Application being O.A. No. 040/00375/2019 along with the Misc. Application No. 040/00055/2022, vide order, dated 24.04.2023, by directing the petitioners, herein, to treat the selection and appointment of the respondent, herein, against the post of Section Officer in Debts Recovery Tribunal(DRT), Guwahati, to be a promotion instead of deputation and to extend to him all consequential benefits.

7. The operative

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top