JUDGMENT :

ARUN BHANSALI, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dt. 6.3.2019 (Annex. 14), whereby, the services of the petitioner, who was working on deputation with the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department ('the borrowing department') have been repatriated back to the Higher Education Department ('the parent department').

2. It is inter alia indicated in the writ petition that pursuant to the advertisement dt. 30/1/15 for deputation on ad hoc basis, applications were invited for the post of Vikas Adhikari. The petitioner being eligible applied for the same and vide Annex. 2 the petitioner was selected through interview, by Annex. 4 No Objection' was accorded for deputation of the petitioner by the parent department and he was relieved on 7/9/15. The petitioner joined on the deputation post on 8/9/15, he was posted as Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Siwana on 4.11.2015, where he joined on 5.11.2015. He continued on deputation with the borrowing department, when pursuant to communication dt. 20.6.2015 from the parent department requiring to relieve the petitioner from the deputation post and to rejoin at the parent department, the Joint Secretary Panchayati. Raj Department indicated that it was not possible to relieve the petitioner: Again on 15.12.2017 the petitioner was required by the parent department to get himself relieved from the deputation post and join at the parent department.

3. By order dt. 13.2.2019, the petitioner was placed Awaiting Posting Order and by order dt. 25.2.2019, he was posted at Bichhiwada (Dungarpur); where the petitioner joined on 1.3.2019, however, by impugned order dt. 6.3.2019 the deputation of the petitioner was put to an end by the borrowing department and he was directed to report to the parent department.

4. It is, thereafter, indicated that the petitioner approached the Minister of the parent department for extension of his deputation, when the Minister by hi; communication Annex. 16 sent to the Minister of borrowing department requested for withdrawing the order dt. 6/3/19.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the action of the respondents in putting an end-to the petitioner's deputation is illegal inasmuch as once by order dt. 25/2/19 (Annex. 2), he was accorded posting at Bichhiwada (Dungarpur), where, he had joined, the same clearly indicated the requirement of petitioner's service in the department; the action of the respondents in ending the deputation cannot be justified.

6. Further submissions have been made that the petitioner was appointed or deputation and was not transferred on deputation and, therefore, the said deputation could not be put to an end without, their being unsuitability of the petitioner or unsatisfactory performance on his part and, therefore, the action of the respondents cannot be justified.

7. Strong Reliance was placed on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in I.K. Mansoori vs. Union of India & Ors., (2017) 3 RLW 1969.

8. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record.

9. A bare look at the advertisement (Annex. 1) reveals Clause (3) of the conditions as under:

^^3- mDr Áfrfu;qfDr lk/kkj.kr% 1 o"kZ dh vof/k ds fy;s gS ijUrq bls jktLFkku xzkeh.k fodkl jkT; lsok@jktLFkku Á'kklfud lsok ds vf/kdkfj;ksa ds miyC/k gksus vFkok Á'kklfud dkj.kksa ls fcuk fdlh iwoZ lwpuk ds lekIr fd;k tk ldsxkA**

10. It was indicated that deputation ordinarily was for a period of one year but the same could be put to an end without prior notice on availability of officers from the Rajasthan Rural Development State Service/Rajasthan Administrative Service or administrative reasons. On the selection of the petitioner pursuant to the above advertisement, the parent department while according its permission (Annex. 4) indicated as under:-

^^Jh bUæflag jktiqjksfgr vuqns'kd 'kkjhfjd f'k{kk ¼vkjŒohŒvkjŒbZŒ,lŒ½ jktdh; egkfo|ky; ckyh] i