CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH O.A. No. 60/319/2025 Chandigarh, this the 1st day of August, 2025 HON’BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A)

Virender Singh son of Shri Brahmanand aged 4 7 y ears, p resently working a s Director Khadi & Village Industries C ommission, S .O. Chandigarh (on deputation), resident of Ward No. 8 , K heri B ura ( 144), Bhiwani, Haryana-127306. Group-A.

…Applicant (BY ADVOCATE: MR. JAGDEEP JASWAL)

VERSUS

1. Union of India through Secretary Ministry of Micro, S mall & M edium Enterprises, Government of India, Udyog Bhawan, R afi M arg, N ew Delhi-110011.

2. Chairman, Khadi & Village Industries Commission, M inistry o f M icro, Small & Medium Enterprises, Government of India, K VIC P avillion, Gandhi Darshan, Rajghat, New Delhi-110002.

3. Khadi & Village Industries Commission, through i ts C hief E xecutive Officer, Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises, G overnment o f India, Gramodaya'3 Irla Road Vile Parle (West), Mumbai-400056.

4. Shri M anoj Kumar, Chairman, Khadi & Village Industries C ommission, Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises, G overnment o f I ndia, KVIC Pavillion, Gandhi Darshan, Rajghat, New Delhi-110002.

...Respondents (BY ADVOCATES: MR. SUMEET MAHAJAN, SR. ADV. A LONG W ITH M R. ASEEM R AI, MS. JYOTI CHAUDHARY, MR. SAURABH G AUTAM, M R.

RAHUL RAY, MR. ROHIT KHANNA AND MR. SHREY SACHDEVA)

O R D E R (Oral)

Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J):

1. This application has been filed by the applicant under s ection 1 9 o f the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 against the i mpugned n ote dated 18.03.2025 whereby the respondent No.3 w as d irected t o repatriate the applicant to his parent department w ith i mmediate effect. The applicant seeks for the following relief:

“ i ) That i mpugned orders dated 18.03.2025 ( Annexure A -1) be quashed being passed with malafide intentions a nd b eing stigmatic, and therefore illegal, arbitrary unconstitutional a nd applicant also prays that he may be allowed t o c omplete h is deputation as per order dated 28.08.2024 (Annexure A-3).

ii) That t his Hon'ble Tribunal may also pass a ny o ther o rder for the grant of relief to the applicant which i t m ay d eem f it i n the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant a re t hat t he applicant w as posted as Principal, Government Polytechnic, L oharu, from 1 3.08.2021 to 06.11.2023. The respondents i ssued a n advertisement dated 04.10.2023 inviting applications f or f illing u p 10 posts of Director in Khadi & Village Industries C ommission (KVIC) in Pay Matrix Level–12 for an initial period o f t hree y ears. Pursuant t hereto, 7 officers including the applicant w ere a ppointed on deputation basis for three years vide order d ated 2 8.08.2024 (Annexure A-3).

3. The a pplicant submits that in terms of Section 5 o f t he K hadi a nd Village Industries Commission Act, 1956, and as c larified b y t he Law Secretary in its note dated 12.10.2006 (Annexure A -5), i t i s the Chief Executive Officer (respondent no.3) who i s v ested w ith the powers of “general superintendence” over t he a ffairs a nd day-to-day functioning of the Commission. It h as f urther b een clarified that Parliament, by amending the provision, i ntentionally divested the Chairman (respondent no.2 & 4) of p owers o f c ontrol over day-to-day management.

4. In v iew of the above statutory framework, the a pplicant s ubmits that it i s respondent no.3 alone who is the competent a uthority t o exercise powers of supervision, including issuance o f a ny s how cause notice or memo. Thus, the impugned M emo d ated 18.03.2025 (Annexure A-1), issued at the instance o f r espondent no.2 & 4, is without jurisdiction.

5. The a pplicant submits that he was initially posted a s D irector, Central Office, Mumbai, and was thereafter transferred t o S tate Office, Chandigarh, vide order dated 25.11.2024 ( Annexure A -7). Respondent no.3 issu