Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Nabanita Biswas Khanra vs Audit on 4 February, 2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ---- -- ayy | couaTazench | AY KOLKATA OL RAS SSA sees No. 0.A.350/420/2021.
Date of order : 04.02.2022 Coram : Hon'ble Mrs.Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member Hon'ble Dr. NanditaChatterjee, Administrative Member * Nabanita Biswas: (Khanra);
_ Wife of Tirtha Khanra, Aged about 37 years, : Working as Senior Auditor in the office of Regional Training institute, Kolkata, 3 MSO Building, CGO Complex,
- 5the Floor, "A" Wing, DF Block, Salt Lake, Sector-l, Kolkata -- 700064 . .
And residing at Natunpally 4 Lane, P.O. Talpukur, Barrackpore, _ PS, Titagarh, _ Kolkata -- 700123.
ww. Applicant --
-VS-
. 1. The Comptroller & Auditor General of India,
- oo ro ' 9, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg, New Delhi -- 110124. )
2. The Director General (Personnel), . Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of india, 9, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg, " New Delhi --- 110124.
3. The Assistant Comptroller & Auditor General (N), Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India, 9, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg, New Delhi -- 110124.
4, The Principal Accountant General, Mowb-ll Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh, Pin- 79ilit.
5. The Director General.
Regional Training Institute, Kolkata, CGO Complex, 3 MSO Building, (Sthe Floor, "A" Wing), DF Block, Salt Lake, Kolkata -- 700064 ' , anieeeRespondents For the applicant : Mr. S.K. Datta, counsel
- Ms. A. Roy, counsel Fortherespondents -- - Mr. S. Basu, counsel ORDER -
-' Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member "The applicant in this O.A._has sought for the following reliefs:
"(a) 'An order quashing and/or setting the orders dated 18.02.2021 and 19.02.2021 at Annexure A-23 and A-24 respectively to this Application,
(b). An order quasting and/or setting aside the decision of the office of the Principal Accountant General, Arunachal Pradesh as contained in Annexure A-19 to this Application;
(c) An order directing the respondents to extend the period of deputation of the applicant for a period of another two years in terms of Annexure A-26 to © this Application being the Circular dated 18.09.2019;
(d) An order directing the respondents to produce/cause production of all _ relevant records,.
(e) Any other order or further order/orders as to this Hon'ble Tribunal may seem fit and proper." i
2. At the outset the respondents had-objected to the jurisdiction on.
the ground that the applicant isa senior Accountant in the Office of the . Principal A¢countant General, Arunachal Pradesh and is posted on deputation to Kolkata, therefore, the jurisdiction lies with the Guwahat! 'Bench of this. Tribunal. Ld. Counsel ' has used a convenience Note/Written Notes of argument which primarily deals with the issue of 'jurisdiction. Ld. Counsel has recorded the decision in Nawal Kishore Sharma vs. Union of India & Others reported in (2014)9 Supreme Court Cases 329 and Kunal Nanda vs. Union of India & Another reported in (2000)5 Supreme Court Cases 362 , alleging that no legal-right of the applicant has been infringed by the respondents within the territorial. limit of this Tribunal's jurisdiction. - 'Having noticed that the applicant is posted on deputation in the "Regional Training Institute, Kolkata' of the indian Audit and Accounts Department and having understood the implication of the provision that "an application shall ordinarily be filed by an applicant with the Registrar of the Bench within whose jurisdiction the applicant is posted for the time being" as in Rule 6 of C.A.T.(Procedure) Rules, 1987 and having noted the definition and cause of action in Black's Law -- Dictionary which reads as under:-
"A group. of operative facts giving rise to one or more bases for suing; a 'factual situation that entitles one person to obtain a remedy in court from another " person....";
_ this Tribunal being satisfied with the. fact that it has jurisdiction, proceeds to hear out the OA.
3. In course of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the applicant, would submit that as an employee under Comptroller and Auditor General, Arunachal 'Pradesh, the applicant on the basis of her application was favoured with deputation with the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), West Bengal. During coritinuance of such deputation she
- applied for deputation to Regional Training Institute(RTI), Kolkata which was approved for one year. Before expiry of the said period the applicant applied for extension of her deputation period. By an order . dated 17" February, 2017 the Indian Audit and Accounts Department, Arunachal Pradesh allowed her to be relieved from the Office to join 'the Office of Accountant General(A&E) , West Berigal on 27". February, 2017(EN) on deputation 0 on spouse ground without deputation allowance. The 3° year-of deputation of the applicant was also approved and communicated vide order dated 01.11.2018 to be ended on 2a February, 2020 with the approve of Principal Accountant General, Indian Audit and Accounts Department , Arunachal Pradesh. The applicant -esponded to a notification for filling up the vacancy of
- Senior Auditor in RTI and vide order dated 11.10.2019 it was intimated that said period of deputation would initially be fora period of 3 years and may "be extended thereafter subject to continuity and administrative convenience whereas the applicant was granted a deputation term of only one year. She however joined.and reported for duty to the RTI, Kolkata on 25.02.2020 and before completion of | 'one year deputation term shé preferred a representation on 08.01.2021 for extension of deputation for a further period of two years i.e. from 25.02.2021 to 24.02.2023. Her prayer was turned down and she was advised to report back to the Office of the Principal! Accountant ~ General, Arunachal Pradesh vide Memo dated 11.02.2021. However, 'by an office order dated -19.02.2021 vide communication dated
15. 04.2021 the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, | it was notified that deputation of Smt. Nabanita Biswas Khanra, Senior . Accountant of P.A.G., Arunachal Pradesh in RTI, Kolkata had been approved by the competent authority rill 5" year for the period from 25.04.2021 to 24.04.2022 in R.T.1, Kolkata.
4. Ld: Counsel for the applicant would submit that since extension -- beyond 5 years is permissible and the applicant has prayed for such extension , the authorities ought to have forwarded her prayer to the competent authority for consideration for extension of her deputation term until 7" year particularly in view of the fact that in RTI, Kolkata . deputation term was made for 3 years whereas in case of the applicant it was initially granted for a period of one year extended to another year.
5. Ld. Counsel! for the applicant further drew our attention to the
- Training Division's circular, dated 18.09.1999 whereunder deputation _ period of RTI has been mentioned as 3 years extendable on yearly basis thereafter. Without submitting on its applicability, he-would also refer tothe circular dated 06.08.2021 issued by the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India which reads as under. :-
"4 Accordingly, it has been decided by the Competent Authority that 'requests for deputation/extension in the tenure of deputation of officials whose spouse is working in Central Government, State Government and public Sector Undertaking may be considered sympathetically and the Heads of Department should strive to post the official at the station of the spouse.
-In case_of inability to accept the requests for deputation of officials on spouse grounds, specific reasons along with case details, may be forwarded to Headquarters office for taking final decision by the Competent Authority. The deputation in such cases will, however, not be treated in public interest.
6. Ld. Counsels were heard and materials on record were perused.
7. Having noted that the prayer for extension of deputation 'can only be considered by the competent authority in the headquarters as extracted above, we would only direct the respondents to forward the request of the applicant to the headquarters immediately sO that the "decision in accordance with law is taken at the earliest and before deputation term ends, with a suitable communication to the applicant. Till such communication, no coercive action be taken against the applicant. --
8, . Accordingly the O.A. stands disposed of. No order as to costs, (Dr.NanditaChatterjee) (Bidisha Banerjee) Administrative Member _ Judicial Member "sb.