Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Repatriation of Deputationist - Sending a person back to their parent department prevents adverse effects on the organization, including security concerns. Deputation periods can be extended without NOC, but this contradicts policy, and the basic principle remains that deputation is temporary and the individual can be returned at any time ["2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 77"].
Employer’s Prerogative - The employer has the right to recall employees on deputation at any time, and deputation does not confer any vested right to continued service or absorption. Employees cannot claim long-term rights or permanency in deputation posts, and the department can revert them before the expiry of the stipulated period ["2025 0 Supreme(All) 2182"].
No Vested Rights - Deputation is a temporary arrangement with no automatic right to continuation or absorption. The Supreme Court has upheld that deputationists can be recalled at will, and any extension requires NOC from the parent department. Once the deputation period ends, the employee must return to the parent department unless otherwise specified ["2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6780"].
Consent and NOC - Deputation cannot be made without the consent of the employee. Repatriation is standard after deputation ends, and transfer or secondment without consent is unlawful. NOC from the parent department is essential for extension or absorption, and the absence of such can lead to cancellation of deputation ["2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 692"], ["SANJAY KUMAR Vs STATE OF HP AND ORS - Himachal Pradesh"].
Cancellation of Deputation - The parent department has the authority to cancel a deputation at any time, especially when administrative exigencies cease. The employee does not have a right to continue against the department’s wishes once the deputation is canceled ["2024 0 Supreme(Raj) 1464"].
Repatriation and Transfer - After deputation, the employee is expected to return to the parent department unless promoted or absorbed. Filling up the vacated post during deputation is permissible, but the relationship with the parent department remains intact, and deputation is a temporary service outside the cadre ["2025 0 Supreme(SC) 684"], ["
Vimal Kumar Mishra VS State Of U. P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Urban Deve. Urban Employment Poverty Alleviation Lko. - Allahabad
"].Analysis and Conclusion:The legal framework and judicial rulings consistently affirm that deputation is a temporary arrangement without vested rights to continuation or absorption. The parent department retains the prerogative to recall or cancel deputation at any time, and the employee’s consent is generally required for initial deputation and extension. Repatriation to the parent department is the norm after deputation, and any extension without NOC contradicts policy. Therefore, a person sent on deputation can be sent back to their parent department multiple times, even without NOC, and cannot claim a right to remain indefinitely or be absorbed unless explicitly agreed upon.
In the complex world of Indian government service rules, plays a crucial role in inter-departmental mobility. But what happens when an employee is sent back to their parent department () and then quickly elsewhere without a () from the parent department? Is this practice lawful, or does it open the door to legal challenges?
This question—Person Sent Back to Parent Department from again Sent to Without from Parent Department—arises frequently in service matters. Drawing from key judgments and , this post breaks down the legal position, supported by case law. Note: This is general information based on precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a lawyer for your situation.
Under Indian service law, a person to their parent department generally cannot be to another department without prior or approval from the parent department, unless explicit statutory rules or policies allow it. Such re- without is typically viewed as illegal, , and challengeable in court2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 599.
is not an employee's automatic right; it requires mutual consent, adherence to rules, and often the parent department's green light 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965 2009 0 Supreme(Gau) 51. Courts have consistently upheld that repatriation is a valid employer prerogative, but flipping back to demands fresh approvals.
means temporary service outside the or department, always with the employee's consent and rule compliance 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 599. It's governed by service rules like those under or state-specific regulations.
The can repatriate an officer at any time for good and sufficient reasons, even before ends. As noted in a key ruling:
The can at anytime even before the end of the period of for good and sufficient reason repatriate an officer to the parent department, as observed by the Apex Court in V. Ramakrishnan case. 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965
This was applied where allegations led to repatriation after inquiry, emphasizing it's not if reasoned 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965. remains with the parent department unless absorbed elsewhere 2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3537 2005 0 Supreme(All) 1334.
Post-repatriation, re- isn't automatic. Courts stress prior from the parent department:
The power to repatriate an officer to the parent department can be exercised at any time for good and sufficient reasons, but exercising the power to re-depute without prior from the parent department is not permissible. 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965
Without it, actions are unlawful 2009 0 Supreme(Gau) 51. For instance, in contexts, parent is mandatory even for permanent shifts 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 1510.
Multiple and decisions reinforce this:- needs consent and rules: No vested right to continue or re-depute 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 599.- Repatriation lawful, re- not without : Challenges succeed if unauthorized 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965 2009 0 Supreme(Gau) 51.
In
, post- expiry mandates return unless promoted, highlighting no indefinite without consent.
Another case involved where improper relieving was quashed, directing resumption but noting need for fresh parent consent for extensions 2016 0 Supreme(Raj) 32. The court allowed appeal, treating relief period as , but stressed formal for renewals.
In rural development scenarios, deputationists were sent back post-term, with no right to re- without parent adjustments 2009 0 Supreme(Mad) 541. Similarly, retrenched employees on lacked rights sans parent consent 2005 0 Supreme(All) 2174.
An employee on is only sent by the parent department for short period with the consent of the employee concerned and he can continue on in only if he had his in the parent department. 2005 0 Supreme(All) 2174
These cases show a pattern: protects parent rights, blocking unauthorized re-deputations 2005 0 Supreme(All) 1334.
While the general rule mandates , exceptions exist:- Specific statutory provisions: E.g., certain rules allowing automatic re-.- Departmental policies: Explicit permissions bypassing standard .- processes: Even here, parent is key, as seen where options for permanent required it 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 1510.
Absent these, re- risks being struck down as capricious. Courts won't interfere in bona fide repatriations but scrutinize re-deputations 2016 0 Supreme(Raj) 32.
For employees, departments, and HR:- Employees: If sans , challenge via as 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965.- Borrowing departments: Always secure prior to avoid quashing orders.- Parent departments: Exercise rights; don't yield without cause.
Key steps for lawful re-:1. Obtain explicit from parent department.2. Ensure employee consent.3. Comply with tenure limits and rules (e.g., no indefinite 2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3537).4. Document reasons to fend off arbitrariness claims.
In one instance, employees transferred to were as liens persisted, settling similar disputes 2005 0 Supreme(All) 1334.
Re- after repatriation without parent department is generally illegal under Indian service law, prone to judicial invalidation unless rules specify otherwise 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965 2009 0 Supreme(Gau) 51. Repatriation upholds service discipline, but re- safeguards integrity.
Key Takeaways:- Repatriation: Lawful anytime with reasons.- Re-: Requires , consent, rules.- Challenge unauthorized actions legally.- Always check specific rules for exceptions.
Stay informed on service jurisprudence to navigate these intricacies. For tailored advice, reach out to legal experts.
References:1. 2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 965: Core on re- invalidity.2. 2009 0 Supreme(Gau) 51: necessity.3. 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 599: Consent principles.4. Additional: 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 1510, 2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3537, 2005 0 Supreme(All) 2174, etc., for contextual support.
#DeputationLaw, #ReDeputationNOC, #ServiceRulesIndia
By sending back the person to his parent department, any adverse effect on the Organisation (RAW) including of reasons of security would be averted. ... The Naya Raipur Development Authority extended the period of deputation up to 31.10.2015 without obtaining the NOC from parent department competent authority which is contradictory to deputation policy and a matter of great concern. ... Union of India, (2000) 5 SCC....
It is the prerogative of the employer to call back its employees sent on deputation. The employee, who has been sent on deputation and, in the present case, namely, petitioners have no right or lien on the deputation post. ... Nideshak, Rajya Nagar Vikas Adhikaran, this Court held that the employee, who was sent on deputation could be reverted back to the parent department prior to the expiry of t....
As per the settled position of law, a deputationist has no vested right to continue in deputation or claim a right to absorption at the end of a period of deputation and he can be sent back to his parent department at any time in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Kunal Nanda ... The basic principle underlying deputation itself is that the person concerned can always and at any time be repatriated to his parent#H....
While Petitioner was working on deputation, options were invited vide O.M. dated 21.12.2020 for appointment on permanent absorption basis in NCLT to the post of Assistant Registrar. Petitioner gave her option and her parent department also sent the NOC. ... 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 #HL....
The learned Sr. counsel strenuously urges that the petitioner was not sent on deputation to DRDA, he was sent on deputation to the P&RD Department and the NOC issued by the Irrigation Department was for his deputation to DRDA. ... The P&RD Department had borrowed the petitioner after due clearance and NOC received from the parent department namely the Irrigation Departm....
Anuj Sharma was sent back to his parent department on completion of his period of deputation. ... Municipal Corporation Act, the Govt. must point out the period and transfer on deputation cannot be for all time to come. Even if person is sent by transfer on deputation, still that person will be holding his lien on his substantive post in the parent department. ... There can be no....
from his parent department to another department without getting any consent from the petitioner and NOC from his department. ... After the expiry period of deputation the employee has to come back to his parent department to occupy the same position unless in the meanwhile he has earned promotion in his parent department as per Recruitment Rules. ... 'Deputation#HL_END....
Nevertheless, the interim order as well as judgment ibid do not provide that in the event the parent department requires service of the petitioner, then he will not be sent back. ... Learned AAG submits that the petitioner was taken on deputation pursuant to the advertisement dated 20.11.2017 (Annexure-1) and as per which, the deputed person was to be returned back to his/her parent department after framing of service rules and regu....
After the expiry period of deputation the employee has to come back to his parent department to occupy the same position unless in the meanwhile he has earned promotion in his parent department as per the Recruitment Rules. ... However, during the period the officer/employee is sent on deputation to the receiving department, the parent department may fill up the post vacated by the deputationist ....
repatriated to his parent department. ... In such case, deputation does not result into recruitment, as no recruitment in its true import and significance takes place as the person is continues to be a member of the parent service. 14. ... of the appellant-petitioner and accordingly repatriated him to his parent department. ... Clause 8 of the term of appointment also provides that in case the appellant-petitioner is found to be guilty of any misconduct or he is found....
Learned Single Judge has rightly analyzed the law on the subject and was perfectly justified in dismissing the writ petition. Learned senior counsel also relied on judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. V. Ramakrishnan, supra, wherein the incumbent on deputation was repatriated back from his deputation to parent department and the Supreme Court observed that the incumbent on deputation can always be sent to parent department and there is no malice in the action of the department.
It was also indicated that persons who were working on deputation as Assistant Executive Engineers would be sent back to the parent Department after the completion of the period of deputation. 8. In the counter affidavit filed by the Rural Development Department before the Tribunal, it was made clear that they have no intention to fill up the post of Assistant Executive Engineer by receiving the officers on deputation again from the Highways Department. 9. The said common order was challenged by the petitioner after taking leave. Therefore, taking into consideration of al....
He states that the petitioners could have been absorbed by the borrowing department with the consent of the lending department while on deputation. An employee on deputation is only sent by the parent department for short period with the consent of the employee concerned and he can continue on deputation in borrowing department only if he had his lien in the parent department.
7. 2004 by which certain employees were sent to their parent department has already been considered and it has been held that they can be sent to their parent department as admittedly liens to their parent department have not been terminated and their services have not been absorbed in the Gram Panchayat, therefore, it is well settled that if a person has been sent on deputation can be repatriated to the parent department and he cannot challenge his repatriation to his parent department unless and until it is shown that his services have been absorbed in the department where he has....
He was sent there on deputation from the Customs department which was his parent department. ( 5 ) RESPONDENT No. l was working in Office of Zonal Director of Narcotics control Bureau, referred to as NCB. Applicants published an Article in their News Paper on 4-12-2001 which was captioned as "mumbai NCB Chief under CBI scanner". The said Article was written by accused No. 4, applicant No. 4 herein.
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
