Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Unknown vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Through ... on 17 October, 2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH CHANDIGARH O.A.No.060/00469/2016 Filed on: 25.05.2016 Reserved on: 13.10.2016 Pronounced on:17.10.2016 Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL, MEMBER (J) HONBLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A) Surender Kumar, Age 43 years, PGT (English) GSSS, Rattewali Panchkula, R/o House No. 196 A, Sector 27, Panchkula. Mobile No. 9855750487, previously working as TGT (English) in K.V. AFS, High Grounds, Chandigarh (Group B) .Applicant Versus
1. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan through the Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, 18 Institutional Area Shaeed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi 110016.
2. The Deputy Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Regional Office, SCO No. 72 and 73, Sector 31-A, Chandigarh.
3. The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya High Ground, Chandigarh.
..Respondents Present: Mr. Kuldeep Singh, counsel for the applicant Mr. R.K. Sharma, counsel for respondents Order BY HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL, MEMBER(J)
1. In this Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, applicant Surender Kumar has prayed for the following relief:-
(i) That for quashing the order dated 22.04.2016 attached as Annexure A-11A where as the respondent has rejected the claim of the applicant for repatriation in Parent department by saying that no lien has been granted by the KVS and further directed to the respondents to allow the applicant to join his duty in his parent department i.e. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan with posting as TGT (English) in KV in and around Chandigarh as per rules, by considering his service record and his lien on the post of TGT (English) in the respondents department and his service be treated as continuous for the purposes of terminal benefits.
(ii) That the applicant be held entitled to all terminal benefits and reliefs as per rules.
2. Facts in the case are not in dispute. Applicant joined service of respondents Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) on 07.12.2002 as TGT (English). His services were confirmed on 07.12.2004. Pursuant to advertisement by State of Haryana for the post of PGT (English), the applicant applied for the same through proper channel vide application dated 13.07.2012 (Annexure A-1) and also gave requisite undertaking regarding retention of lien (Annexure A-2) that he shall either repatriate to KVS within two years from the date of joining the new post or resign from the post in KVS at the end of that period. He also agreed to pay leave salary and pension contribution at the prescribed rate. He was appointed PGT (English) in Haryana vide order dated 05.03.2014 (Annexure A-3). Thereupon, the applicant submitted technical resignation dated 10.03.2014 (Annexure A-4) from the KVS with request to retain his lien in KVS for two years. His technical resignation was accepted vide order dated 31.03.2014 (Annexure A-5) w.e.f. 18.03.2014 (afternoon). Accordingly, he was relieved on 16.04.2014(afternoon) vide relieving order dated 16.04.2014 (Annexure A-6). Thereupon, he joined as PGT (English) in Haryana on 17.04.2014 (forenoon) vide joining report of even date (Annexure A-6/A). Respondent No. 2- Deputy Commissioner, KVS sent request of the applicant for retention of lien to Respondent No. 1 Commissioner, KVS vide letter dated 25.04.2014 (Annexure A-7).
3. Within lien period of two years, the applicant made application dated 13.01.2016 (Annexure A-8) to Block Education Officer, Barwala (Haryana) and application (Annexure A-9) to KVS for repatriation to KVS. Respondent No. 2 forwarded the said application to Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 17.03.2016 (Annexure A-10). Respondent No. 3- Principal KV vide letter dated 18.05.2016 (Annexure A-11) forwarded to the applicant impugned letter dated 22.04.2016 (Annexure A-11/A) intimating that no lien has been granted to the applicant by KVS because his proposal for grant of lien was forwarded by Respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 25.04.2014 after relieving the applicant on 16.04.2014.
4. Case of the applicant is that he applied for the post of PGT (English) in Haryana State through proper channel with necessary undertaking to retain his lien in KVS. In his technical resignation also, he prayed for retention of his lien for two years with the respondents. He made application for repatriation to KVS within the lien period of two years. Consequently, the applicant as a matter of right retained his lien with respondents and is entitled to be repatriated. Reference has also been made to instructions dated 26.12.2013 (Annexure A-12) of DoP&T regarding retention of lien.
5. Respondents in their written statement while not disputing the factual position reiterated that the applicant was relieved from KVS without approval of his lien and, therefore, his lien was not retained. His request for retention of lien was forwarded by Respondent No. 2 to Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 25.04.2014 after the applicants resignation had been accepted vide letter dated 31.03.2014 w.e.f. 18.03.2014 and after the applicant had already been relieved from KVS on 16.04.2014. Consequently, repatriation of the applicant to KVS has been rightly declined. Reliance has been placed on instructions dated 08.06.1972 (Annexure R-2) stipulating prior approval of the Commissioner for retention of lien for two years. In the instant case, there was no such prior approval.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.
7. Learned counsel for the parties reiterated their respective version.
8. We have carefully considered the matter.
9. The applicant is entitled to succeed because he forwarded his application for PGT (English) in Haryana through proper channel. Along with his application, he also gave requisite undertaking to the respondents regarding retention of his lien. Even in his technical resignation (Annexure A-4), the applicant prayed for retention of his lien. Consequently, there was no lapse on the part of the applicant to enable him to retain his lien with the respondents. If Respondent No. 2 belatedly forwarded the application of the applicant for retention of lien to Respondent No. 1, the applicant cannot be made to suffer for the same. The applicant had made his request for retention of lien in his technical resignation (Annexure A-4) itself i.e. much before acceptance of his resignation and before he was relieved by the respondents. According to instructions dated 26.12.2013 (Annexure A-12) of DoP&T, the lien is automatically retained for two years in such circumstances and such lien may in no circumstances be terminated even with the consent of the employee. Consequently, the applicant retained his lien with the respondents for two years. Even according to instructions dated 08.06.1972 (Annexure R-2) relied on by the respondents, the applicant should have been allowed to retain his lien with the respondents. If the respondents themselves did not act timely on his request for retention of lien, then fault lies with the respondents and not with the applicant. For the same, the applicant cannot be made to suffer.
10. The applicant applied for his repatriation to the respondents within the lien period of two years. Consequently, he is entitled to be repatriated with all consequential benefits subject to usual terms and conditions including payment of leave salary and pension contribution etc. by the applicant to the respondents. Impugned order dated 22.04.2016 (Annexure A-11/A) is completely illegal and unsustainable.
11. Resultantly, the instant O.A. is allowed. Impugned order dated 22.04.2016 (Annexure A-11/A) rejecting the claim of the applicant for repatriation to the respondents is set aside. Respondents are directed to repatriate the applicant as TGT (English) in KVS subject to usual terms and conditions including payment of leave salary and pension contribution etc. by the applicant to the respondents. The applicant shall be entitled to consequential benefits including continuity of service as per rules. Needful be done within two months of the receipt of certified copy of this order. No costs.
(RAJWANT SANDHU) (JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
PLACE: Chandigarh
Dated: 17.10.2016
mw
-5- O.A.No.060/00469/2016