Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh

P Ravi Teja Naidu vs Semi-Conductor Leboratory on 29 January, 2026

                                                                ​1​            ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​


                                  ​CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL​
                                          ​CHANDIGARH BENCH​
                                                 ​O.A.No.060/991/2025​
                                     ​Chandigarh, Order Reserved: 28.11.2025​
                                                        ​Pronounced:29.01.2026​

                         ​ ORAM:​
                         C
                          ​HON'BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J)​

​P.​ ​RAVI​ ​TEJA​ ​NAIDU​ ​AGED​ ​ABOUT​ ​32​ ​YEARS​​S/o​​SH.​​SATYANARAYANA​ ​PAMIDIPARTHI​ ​RESIDENT​ ​OF​ ​HOUSE​ ​NO.​ ​779,​ ​2ND​ ​FLOOR,​ ​TDI​ ​CITY,​ ​SECTOR 117, S.A.S. NAGAR - 160055, PUNJAB.​ ​...Applicant​ ​(BY ADVOCATE: MS. AMRITA GARG)​ ​VERSUS​ ​1.​ ​UNION​ ​OF​ ​INDIA,​ ​THROUGH​ ​THE​ ​SECRETARY,​ ​DEPARTMENT​ ​OF​ ​SPACE,​ ​GOVERNMENT​ ​OF​ ​INDIA,​ ​ISRO​ ​HEADQUARTERS,​ ​ANTRIKSH​ ​BHAWAN, NEW BEL ROAD, BENGALURU-560094​ ​2.​ ​THE​ ​MINISTRY​ ​OF​ ​ELECTRONICS​ ​AND​ ​INFORMATION​ ​TECHNOLOGY,​ ​GOVERNMENT​ ​OE​ ​INDIA,​ ​THROUGH​ ​THE​ ​SECRETARY,​ ​1ST​ ​FLOOR,​ ​ELECTRONICS​ ​NIKETAN,​ ​6,​ ​CGO​ ​COMPLEX,​ ​LODHI​ ​ROAD,​ ​NEW​ ​DELHI​ ​-110001​ ​3.​ ​THE​ ​DIRECTOR​ ​GENERAL,​ ​SEMI-CONDUCTOR​ ​LABORATORY,​​SECTOR​ ​72, S.A.S. NAGAR, MOHALI, PUNJAB - 160071​ ​...Respondents​ ​(BY ADVOCATE: MR. SANJAY GOYAL, SR. CGSC)​ ​ R D E R​ O ​Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J):​ ​1.​ ​The​ ​present​ ​Original​ ​Application,​ ​filed​ ​under​ ​Section​ ​19​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Administrative​ ​Tribunals​ ​Act,​ ​1985​ ​is​ ​directed​ ​against​ ​the​ ​actions​ ​of​ ​respondents​ ​in​ ​not​ ​relieving​ ​him​ ​from​ ​Semi-Conductor​ ​Laboratory,​ ​Mohali​ ​to​ ​join​ ​ISRO's​ ​Satish​ ​Dhawan​ ​Space​ ​Centre,​ ​Sriharikota​ ​on​ ​spousal​ ​grounds.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​is​ ​also​ ​aggrieved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​failure​ ​of​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​to​ ​take​ ​appropriate​ ​actions​ ​to​ ​protect​ ​his​ ​status​ ​as​ ​an​ ​employee​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Department​ ​of​ ​Space​ ​(DOS)​ ​Whose​ ​service​ ​he​ ​had​ ​joined in 2015. The applicant has prayed for reliefs as under:​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 +05'30' ​2​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​"​ ​i)​ ​Respondents​ ​may​ ​kindly​ ​be​ ​directed​ ​to​ ​forthwith​ ​relieve​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​from​ ​Semi​ ​Conductor​ ​Laboratory,​ ​Mohali​ ​in​ ​order​ ​to​ ​join​ ​ISRO's​ ​Satish​​Dhawan​​Space​​Centre,​​Sriharikota​​on​​spousal​​grounds​ ​as his transfer already stands approved;​ ​ii)​ ​Respondents​ ​may​ ​kindly​ ​be​ ​directed​ ​to​ ​protect​ ​the​ ​status​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​as​ ​an​ ​employee​ ​of​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​alongwith​ ​all​ ​consequential​ ​service​ ​benefits,​ ​notwithstanding​ ​the​ ​issuance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​notification​ ​dated​ ​07.02.2022​ ​wherein​ ​the​ ​administrative​ ​control​ ​of​ ​Semi-Conductor​ ​Laboratory​ ​(SCL)​ ​was​ ​vested​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Ministry​ ​of​ ​Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY);​ ​iii)​​Declare​​that​​the​​notification​​dated​​07.02.2022​​does​​not​​affect​​the​ ​service​ ​conditions​ ​and​ ​vested​ ​rights​ ​of​​the​​applicant​​who​​had​​joined​ ​the service of DoS as a Government employee in 2015;​ ​iv)​ ​Any​​other​​suitable​​direction​​which​​this​​Hon'ble​​Tribunal​​deems​​fit​ ​and​​proper​​in​​the​​facts​​and​​circumstances​​of​​this​​case​​may​​kindly​​be​ ​passed."​ ​2.​ ​Facts​ ​of​ ​the​ ​case​ ​in​ ​brief​ ​are​ ​as​ ​follows.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​is​ ​an​ ​alumnus​​of​​the​​Indian​​Institute​​of​​Space​​Science​​and​​Technology​​(IIST),​ ​Thiruvananthapuram,​ ​from​ ​where​ ​he​ ​successfully​ ​completed​ ​his​ ​B.Tech​ ​(Avionics)​​during​​the​​academic​​session​​2011-2015.​​IIST​​is​​an​​institution​ ​wholly​ ​established,​ ​funded,​ ​and​ ​controlled​ ​by​​the​​Department​​of​​Space​ ​(DoS),​​Government​​of​​India.​​Admission​​to​​IIST​​was​​accompanied​​by​​an​ ​assurance​ ​that​ ​students​ ​securing​ ​the​ ​prescribed​ ​minimum​ ​CGPA​ ​would​ ​be​ ​absorbed​ ​as​ ​Scientist/Engineer​ ​'SC'​ ​in​ ​DoS/ISRO,​ ​subject​ ​to​ ​execution​ ​of​ ​a​ ​mandatory​​service​​bond.​​Pursuant​​thereto,​​the​​applicant​ ​secured​ ​the​ ​requisite​ ​merit​ ​and​ ​was​ ​offered​ ​appointment​ ​as​ ​Scientist/Engineer​ ​'SC'​ ​in​ ​the​ ​pay​ ​band​ ​of​ ​₹15600-39100​ ​with​ ​Grade​ ​Pay​ ​₹5400/-​ ​vide​ ​absorption​ ​order​ ​dated​ ​14.08.2015​ ​issued​ ​by​ ​ISRO.​ ​The​ ​appointment​ ​was​ ​explicitly​ ​described​​as​​absorption​​into​​DoS/ISRO,​ ​with​ ​liability​ ​to​ ​be​ ​posted​ ​at​ ​any​ ​centre​ ​of​ ​DoS/ISRO.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​executed​ ​a​ ​co-bond​ ​of​ ​₹10​ ​lakhs​ ​to​ ​serve​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​for​ ​a​ ​minimum​ 2026.02.02 ​period​ ​of​ ​five​ ​years.​ ​The​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​appointment​ ​further​ ​stipulated​ ​that​ SHIVAM 16:33:42 +05'30' ​3​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​upon​ ​completion​ ​of​ ​probation,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​would​ ​be​ ​treated​ ​as​ ​a​ ​regular government servant governed by DoS rules.​ ​3.​ ​In​ ​accordance​ ​with​ ​the​ ​vacancy​ ​position​ ​and​ ​counselling​ ​held​ ​by​ ​DoS/ISRO,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​was​ ​posted​ ​to​ ​Semi-Conductor​ ​Laboratory​ ​(SCL),​ ​Mohali​ ​and​ ​joined​ ​there​ ​on​ ​03.09.2015.​ ​At​ ​the​ ​time​ ​of​ ​joining,​ ​SCL​​functioned​​as​​a​​centre​​under​​DoS,​​and​​the​​applicant​​was​​issued​​an​ ​identity​ ​card​ ​reflecting​ ​his​ ​status​ ​as​ ​a​ ​DoS​ ​employee.​ ​The​ ​appointing​ ​and​​disciplinary​​authority​​throughout​​remained​​DoS/ISRO.​​The​​applicant​ ​thereafter​ ​completed​ ​probation,​ ​fulfilled​ ​the​ ​mandatory​ ​bond​ ​period​​by​ ​2020,​ ​and​ ​was​ ​promoted​ ​to​ ​the​ ​post​ ​of​ ​Scientist​ ​'SE'.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​asserts that his service record has remained unblemished.​ ​4.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​married​ ​on​ ​10.02.2022.​ ​His​ ​spouse​ ​is​ ​a​ ​Scientist​ ​'SD'​ ​posted​ ​at​ ​Satish​ ​Dhawan​​Space​​Centre​​(SDSC),​​Sriharikota,​​which​ ​is​ ​also​ ​a​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​centre.​ ​Seeking​ ​to​ ​maintain​ ​family​ ​life​ ​and​ ​citing​ ​spousal​ ​grounds​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​medical​ ​condition​ ​of​ ​his​ ​aged​ ​parents​ ​residing​ ​in​ ​Andhra​ ​Pradesh,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​submitted​ ​a​ ​representation​ ​dated​ ​02.02.2022​ ​seeking​ ​transfer​ ​to​ ​SDSC​ ​SHAR.​ ​The​ ​request​ ​was​ ​recommended​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Director,​ ​SCL​ ​and​ ​forwarded​ ​for​ ​further​ ​consideration​ ​on​ ​22.03.2022.​ ​Subsequent​ ​representations​ ​and​ ​reminders​ ​were​ ​submitted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​from​​time​​to​​time.​​Notably.​ ​In​ ​July​ ​2023,​ ​the​ ​Department​​of​​Space​​forwarded​​the​​request​​to​​MeitY,​ ​which​ ​in​ ​turn​ ​advised​ ​SCL​ ​to​ ​take​ ​appropriate​ ​action.​​Despite​​approval​ ​at​ ​multiple​ ​levels,​ ​no​ ​relieving​​order​​was​​issued​​even​​after​​the​​lapse​​of​ ​more than three years.​ ​5.​ ​During​ ​the​ ​pendency​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant's​ ​transfer​ ​request,​ ​notification​ ​dated​ ​07.02.2022​ ​was​ ​issued​ ​amending​ ​the​ ​Allocation​ ​of​ ​Business​ ​Rules,​ ​whereby​ ​administrative​ ​control​ ​of​ ​SCL,​ ​Mohali​ ​was​ ​transferred​ ​from​ ​DoS​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Ministry​ ​of​ ​Electronics​ ​and​ ​Information​ ​Technology​ ​(MeitY).​ ​The​ ​notification​ ​was​ ​silent​ ​regarding​ ​the​ ​status​ ​of​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​DoS/ISRO​ ​employees​ ​already​ ​posted​ ​at​ ​SCL,​ ​including​ ​the​ ​applicant.​ +05'30' ​4​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​This​ ​led​ ​to​ ​uncertainty​ ​regarding​ ​the​​service​​status​​of​​such​​employees.​ ​Minutes​​of​​the​​12th​​SCL​​Management​​Council​​meeting​​dated​​27.06.2022​ ​record​ ​acknowledgment​ ​of​ ​this​ ​anomaly​ ​and​ ​differentiate​ ​between​ ​employees​ ​directly​ ​recruited​ ​by​ ​SCL​ ​Society​ ​and​ ​those​ ​appointed​ ​by​ ​DoS/ISRO.​ ​As​ ​an​ ​interim​ ​arrangement,​ ​employees​ ​like​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​were treated as being on deemed deputation from DoS to SCL.​ ​6.​ ​In​ ​meeting​​dated​​28.04.2023​​chaired​​by​​the​​Additional​​Secretary,​ ​MeitY,​​the​​Controller​​of​​SCL​​admitted​​that​​the​​entire​​recruitment​​process​ ​of​ ​such​ ​employees​ ​had​ ​been​ ​conducted​ ​exclusively​ ​by​ ​DoS,​ ​and​ ​that​ ​SCL​ ​merely​ ​received​ ​copies​ ​of​ ​appointment​ ​letters.​ ​DoS​ ​thereafter​ ​issued​​communications​​indicating​​that​​such​​employees​​would​​be​​treated​ ​as​ ​on​​deemed​​deputation​​for​​a​​limited​​period,​​pending​​final​​decision​​on​ ​their​ ​status.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​averred​ ​that​ ​despite​ ​multiple​ ​communications​ ​and​ ​extension​ ​of​ ​deemed​ ​deputation,​ ​no​ ​final​​decision​ ​was​ ​taken​ ​even​ ​after​ ​more​ ​than​ ​two​ ​years,​ ​and​ ​during​ ​this​ ​period,​ ​several​ ​service​ ​benefits​ ​available​ ​to​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​as​ ​a​ ​DoS​ ​employee,​ ​including​ ​CHSS​ ​medical​ ​benefits​ ​and​ ​other​ ​welfare​ ​schemes,​ ​were​ ​withdrawn, without any hearing.​ ​7.​ ​In​ ​August​ ​2024,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​was​ ​given​ ​a​ ​one-time​ ​option​ ​to​ ​either​ ​continue​ ​on​ ​SCL​ ​rolls​ ​or​ ​move​ ​out​ ​to​ ​any​​DoS/ISRO​​centre.​​The​ ​applicant​ ​unequivocally​ ​opted​ ​to​ ​move​ ​out​ ​of​ ​SCL,​ ​expressing​ ​preference​ ​for​ ​posting​ ​at​ ​SDSC​ ​SHAR​ ​on​ ​spousal​ ​grounds.​ ​Even​ ​thereafter,​​no​​relieving​​or​​posting​​orders​​were​​issued.​​The​​applicant​​has​ ​submitted​ ​that​ ​RTI​ ​response​ ​dated​ ​09.07.2025​ ​confirmed​ ​that​ ​the​ ​matter​ ​had​ ​not​ ​been​ ​placed​​before​​the​​Union​​Cabinet​​and​​that​​transfer​ ​of​ ​SCL​ ​employees​ ​to​ ​ISRO​ ​was​ ​still​ ​under​ ​examination.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​​further​​averred​​that​​his​​wife​​is​​expecting​​a​​child,​​and​​the​​pendency​ ​on​ ​his​ ​transfer​ ​request​ ​has​ ​further​ ​aggravated​ ​the​ ​hardship​ ​caused​ ​by​ ​continued inaction.​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 +05'30' ​5​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​8.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​challenged​ ​the​ ​impugned​ ​action​ ​of​ ​the​ ​appointment​ ​order,​ ​bond​ ​conditions,​ ​medical​ ​examination,​ ​promotional​ ​process,​ ​and​ ​admissions​ ​by​ ​authorities​ ​unequivocally​​establish​​that​​the​ ​applicant​ ​was​ ​appointed​ ​as​ ​a​ ​regular​ ​government​ ​servant​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Department​ ​of​ ​Space​ ​and​ ​not​ ​as​ ​an​ ​employee​ ​of​ ​the​ ​SCL​ ​Society.​ ​Posting​ ​at​ ​SCL​ ​was​ ​only​ ​a​ ​placement​ ​at​ ​a​ ​DoS​ ​centre,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​respondents cannot unilaterally alter the applicant's service status.​ ​9.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​asserts​ ​that​ ​it​ ​is​ ​settled​ ​law​ ​that​ ​government​ ​servants​ ​do​ ​not​ ​lose​ ​their​ ​status​ ​merely​ ​because​ ​they​ ​are​ ​deployed​ ​to​ ​another​ ​institution​ ​owned​ ​or​ ​controlled​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Government.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​contends​ ​that​ ​the​ ​attempt​ ​to​ ​retrospectively​ ​treat​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​as​ ​an​ ​SCL​ ​employee​ ​is​ ​contrary​ ​to​ ​the​ ​law​ ​laid​ ​down​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Constitution Bench in​​State of Gujarat v. Raman Lal​​Keshav Lal Soni​​.​ ​10.​ ​The​​applicant​​asserts​​that​​the​​impugned​​action​​creates​​an​​artificial​ ​and​ ​hostile​ ​classification​ ​between​ ​identically​ ​recruited​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​employees​ ​solely​ ​on​ ​the​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​their​ ​centre​ ​of​ ​posting,​ ​and​ ​such​ ​classification​ ​lacks​ ​intelligible​ ​differentia​ ​and​ ​rational​ ​nexus,​ ​and​ ​is​ ​violative​ ​of​​Articles​​14​​and​​16​​of​​the​​Constitution.​​The​​applicant​​further​ ​asserts​ ​that​ ​no​ ​opportunity​ ​of​ ​hearing​ ​was​ ​granted​ ​to​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​before withdrawal of service benefits and denial of transfer rights.​ ​11.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​argues​ ​that​ ​the​ ​notification​ ​dated​ ​07.02.2022​ ​and​ ​subsequent​ ​actions​ ​have​ ​civil​​consequences​​and​ ​therefore​​offend​​principles​​of​​natural​​justice.​​It​​is​​further​​contended​​that​ ​the​ ​notification​ ​dated​ ​07.02.2022​ ​operates​ ​prospectively​ ​and​ ​cannot​ ​disturb​​vested​​rights​​accrued​​to​​the​​applicant​​prior​​thereto.​​It​​is​​further​ ​argued​ ​by​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​that​ ​service​ ​conditions​ ​applicable​​at​​the​​time​​of​​appointment​​cannot​​be​​altered​​to​​the​​detriment​ ​of the employee by subsequent executive action.​ ​12.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​further​ ​asserted​ ​that​ ​having​ ​been​ ​assured​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​government​ ​service​ ​under​ ​DoS​ ​and​ ​having​ ​altered​ ​his​ ​position​ +05'30' ​6​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​irreversibly​ ​by​ ​joining​ ​IIST​ ​and​ ​executing​ ​a​​service​​bond,​​the​​applicant​ ​had​ ​a​ ​legitimate​ ​expectation​ ​that​ ​his​ ​service​ ​status​ ​and​ ​attendant​ ​benefits​ ​would​ ​be​ ​protected.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​argued​ ​by​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​that​ ​the​ ​impugned​ ​action​ ​of​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​demonstrates​ ​that​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​been​ ​sought​ ​to​ ​be​ ​deprived​ ​of​ ​the​ ​status​ ​which​ ​violates​ ​the​ ​doctrine​ ​of​ ​promissory​ ​estoppel.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​further​ ​argued​ ​by​ ​learned​​counsel​​for​​the​​applicant​​that​​the​​applicant's​​request​​for​​transfer​ ​on​ ​spousal​ ​grounds​ ​stands​ ​approved​ ​at​ ​multiple​ ​levels,​ ​yet​ ​has​ ​remained​ ​unimplemented​ ​for​ ​over​ ​three​ ​years,​ ​and​ ​such​ ​inaction​ ​is​ ​arbitrary,​ ​unreasonable,​ ​and​ ​violative​ ​of​ ​the​ ​right​ ​to​ ​family​ ​life​ ​and​ ​dignity,​ ​especially​​in​​light​​of​​the​​applicant's​​spouse's​​pregnancy​​and​​the​ ​medical condition of his parents.​ ​13.​ ​The​​replying​​Respondent​​Nos.​​2​​and​​3​​have​​contested​​the​​claim​​of​ ​the​ ​applicant.​ ​It​ ​is​​contended​​by​​the​​respondents​​that​​the​​OA​​is​​devoid​ ​of​​any​​valid​​or​​subsisting​​cause​​of​​action,​​as​​no​​final​​or​​adverse​​decision​ ​has​ ​been​ ​taken​ ​against​ ​the​ ​applicant.​ ​The​​respondents​​have​​submitted​ ​that​ ​the​ ​issue​ ​of​ ​one-time​ ​transfer/permanent​ ​absorption​ ​of​ ​SCL​ ​employees​ ​into​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​is​​still​​under​​active​​consideration​​at​​the​​level​ ​of​ ​DoS/ISRO,​ ​as​ ​reflected​ ​in​ ​official​ ​communication​ ​dated​ ​11.09.2024.​ ​Hence, the OA is premature and non-maintainable.​ ​14.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​asserted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​replying​ ​Respondent​ ​Nos.​ ​2​ ​&​ ​3​ ​that​ ​they​ ​have​ ​no​ ​jurisdiction​ ​or​ ​competence​ ​to​ ​decide​ ​matters​ ​relating​ ​to​ ​absorption​ ​or​ ​transfer​ ​of​ ​SCL​ ​employees​ ​into​ ​DoS/ISRO.​ ​It​ ​has​ ​been​ ​submitted​ ​that​ ​SCL​ ​is​ ​an​ ​autonomous​ ​body​ ​under​ ​MeitY,​ ​having​ ​been​ ​transferred​ ​from​ ​DoS​ ​vide​ ​Gazette​ ​Notification​ ​dated​ ​07.02.2022,​ ​and​ ​decisions​ ​on​ ​absorption​​fall​​exclusively​​within​​the​​domain​​of​​DoS/ISRO.​ ​The​ ​respondents​ ​further​ ​submit​ ​that​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​no​ ​legal,​ ​statutory,​​or​​contractual​​right​​to​​claim​​transfer​​or​​permanent​​absorption​ ​into​ ​DoS/ISRO,​ ​as​ ​such​ ​matters​ ​are​ ​governed​ ​by​ ​administrative​ ​policy​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​and​ ​discretion,​ ​subject​ ​to​ ​suitability,​ ​organizational​ ​requirements,​ ​and​ +05'30' ​7​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​prescribed​ ​procedures.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​has​ ​vehemently contended that transfer/absorption is not a matter of right.​ ​15.​ ​The​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​placed​ ​reliance​ ​on​ ​Office​ ​Memorandum​ ​dated​ ​25.01.2022​ ​issued​ ​by​ ​DoS,​ ​whereby​ ​mobility​​provisions​​between​ ​autonomous​ ​bodies​ ​and​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​Centres/Units​ ​were​ ​withdrawn​ ​with​ ​immediate​​effect,​​except​​in​​cases​​of​​public​​interest.​​It​​is​​submitted​​that​ ​any​ ​transfer​ ​thereafter​ ​requires​ ​notification​ ​of​ ​vacancies​ ​and​ ​selection​ ​through​ ​due​ ​process.​ ​The​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​further​ ​submitted​​that​​the​ ​applicant's​ ​earlier​ ​transfer​ ​requests​ ​dated​ ​14.07.2020​ ​and​ ​18.11.2021​ ​were​ ​considered​ ​but​​not​​approved​​due​​to​​suitability​​issues​​identified​​by​ ​the​ ​receiving​ ​ISRO​ ​centre​ ​(URSC,​ ​Bangalore),​ ​which​ ​decisions​ ​were​ ​beyond the control of SCL.​ ​16.​ ​The​​respondents​​assert​​that​​the​​applicant​​knowingly​​joined​​SCL​​as​ ​an​ ​autonomous​ ​body​ ​and​ ​continued​ ​in​​service​​with​​full​​awareness,​​and​ ​is​ ​estopped​ ​from​ ​contending​ ​otherwise.​ ​The​ ​respondents​​further​​assert​ ​that​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​suppressed​ ​material​ ​facts,​ ​including​ ​rejection​ ​of​ ​earlier​​transfer​​requests,​​issuance​​of​​OM​​dated​​25.01.2022​​withdrawing​ ​mobility,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​pendency​ ​of​ ​policy​ ​consideration​ ​for​ ​one-time​ ​absorption, thereby approaching the Tribunal with unclean hands.​ ​17.​ ​The​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​submitted​ ​that​ ​SCL​​has​​acted​​diligently​​by​ ​processing​​and​​forwarding​​the​​applicant's​​case​​through​​proper​​channels,​ ​placing​ ​the​ ​matter​ ​before​ ​the​ ​Management​ ​Council,​ ​and​ ​coordinating​ ​with​ ​DoS​ ​and​ ​MeitY​ ​as​ ​required.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​has​ ​contended​ ​that​ ​no​ ​arbitrariness​ ​or​ ​illegality​ ​is​ ​attributable​ ​to​ ​the​ ​respondents.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​further​ ​argues​ ​that​ ​the​ ​case​ ​law​ ​cited​ ​by​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​is​ ​distinguishable​ ​on​ ​facts​ ​and​ ​not​ ​applicable to the present case.​ ​18.​ ​The​​applicant​​has​​filed​​rejoinder​​to​​reply​​filed​​by​​the​​respondents,​ ​and​ ​contested​ ​the​ ​contentions​ ​raised​ ​by​ ​the​​replying​​respondents.​​It​​is​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​asserted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​that​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​failed​ ​to​ ​comply​ +05'30' ​8​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​with​ ​this​ ​Tribunal's​ ​order​​dated​​10.10.2025,​​which​​directed​​Respondent​ ​No.​​3​​to​​place​​on​​record​​the​​action​​taken​​on​​the​​letter​​dated​​27.07.2023​ ​issued​ ​by​ ​Respondent​ ​No.​ ​2​ ​regarding​ ​the​ ​applicant's​ ​transfer.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​contends​ ​that​ ​instead​ ​of​ ​placing​ ​the​ ​required​ ​document​ ​on​ ​record,​​vague​​and​​evasive​​averments​​have​​been​​made,​​reflecting​​lack​​of​ ​bona fides.​ ​19.​ ​The​​applicant​​has​​reiterated​​that​​he​​is​​not​​seeking​​a​​fresh​​transfer,​ ​but​ ​is​ ​only​ ​challenging​ ​the​ ​arbitrary​ ​failure​ ​of​ ​the​​respondents​​to​​issue​ ​relieving​​orders​​despite​​the​​transfer​​having​​already​​been​​approved​​by​​all​ ​concerned​ ​authorities​ ​in​ ​2023.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​expressly​ ​drawn​ ​attention​ ​to​ ​letters​ ​dated​ ​22.03.2022,​ ​20.07.2023​ ​and​ ​27.07.2023​ ​on​ ​record​ ​in​ ​support​ ​of​ ​his​ ​contention.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​reiterates​ ​that​ ​once​ ​the​ ​transfer​ ​on​ ​spouse​ ​grounds​ ​stood​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​Respondent​ ​No.​ ​3​ ​and​ ​was​ ​thereafter​ ​processed​ ​and​ ​forwarded​ ​by​ ​Respondent​ ​No.​​1​​and​ ​Respondent​​No.​​2,​​nothing​​remained​​except​​issuance​​of​​relieving​​orders​ ​by​ ​Respondent​ ​No.​ ​3.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​argued​ ​that​ ​the​ ​prolonged​ ​inaction for more than two years is arbitrary and unreasonable.​ ​20.​ ​It​ ​has​ ​been​ ​further​ ​reiterated​ ​by​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​that​ ​he​ ​is​ ​a​ ​Group-A​ ​Gazetted​ ​officer​ ​of​​DOS/ISRO,​​appointed​​as​​Scientist/Engineer​ ​'SC',​ ​and​ ​not​ ​an​ ​employee​ ​of​ ​SCL,​ ​and​ ​his​ ​deployment​ ​at​ ​SCL​ ​is​ ​asserted​ ​to​ ​be​ ​only​ ​on​ ​deemed​ ​deputation,​ ​which​ ​does​ ​not​ ​alter​ ​his​ ​status​ ​as​ ​a​ ​Government​ ​of​ ​India​ ​employee.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​relied​ ​upon​ ​his​ ​appointment​ ​letter,​ ​co-bond,​ ​APARs​ ​and​ ​vacancy​ ​notifications​ ​to​​reinforce​​this​​position.​​The​​applicant​​further​​argues​​that​​any​​attempt​ ​to​ ​unilaterally​ ​change​ ​the​ ​applicant's​ ​status​ ​from​ ​a​ ​government​ ​employee​ ​to​ ​that​ ​of​ ​an​ ​autonomous​ ​body​ ​employee​ ​is​ ​illegal,​ ​arbitrary​ ​and contrary to settled law.​ ​21.​ ​The​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​further​ ​contended​ ​that​ ​his​ ​case​ ​cannot​ ​be​ ​clubbed​​with​​a​​general​​or​​proposed​​policy​​regarding​​one-time​​absorption​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​of​ ​SCL​ ​employees​ ​into​ ​DOS/ISRO,​ ​as​ ​his​ ​transfer​ ​on​ ​spouse​ ​grounds​ +05'30' ​9​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​was​ ​individually​ ​considered​ ​and​ ​already​ ​approved.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​argues​ ​that​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​taken​ ​a​ ​contradictory​ ​stand,​ ​whereas​ ​on​ ​the​ ​one​ ​hand​ ​they​ ​are​ ​claiming​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​jurisdiction​ ​and​​passing​​responsibility​​to​​DOS/ISRO,​​and​​on​​the​​other​​hand​​they​​are​ ​admitting​ ​that​ ​the​ ​applicant's​ ​transfer​ ​case​ ​was​ ​received,​ ​reconsidered​ ​and​ ​pending​ ​issuance​ ​of​ ​orders​ ​by​ ​Respondent​ ​No.​ ​3.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​​the​​applicant​​asserts​​that​​this​​is​​a​​deliberate​​evasion​​of​​responsibility​ ​on the part of the respondents.​ ​22.​ ​Learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​further​ ​argued​ ​that​ ​OM​ ​dated​ ​25.01.2022​ ​relied​ ​upon​ ​by​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​dealing​ ​with​ ​transfer/absorption​ ​from​ ​an​ ​autonomous​ ​body​ ​to​ ​a​ ​government​ ​department,​​has​​no​​applicability,​​as​​the​​applicant​​is​​seeking​​to​​return​​to​ ​his parent department from deputation.​ ​23.​ ​I​ ​have​ ​heard​ ​the​ ​arguments​ ​addressed​ ​by​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​both​​sides​​and​​carefully​​gone​​through​​the​​pleadings​​and​​the​​material​​on​ ​record.​ ​24.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​undisputed​ ​that​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​was​ ​offered​ ​appointment​ ​as​ ​Scientist​ ​'SC'​ ​vide​ ​absorption​ ​order​ ​dated​ ​14.08.2015​ ​issued​ ​by​ ​ISRO/DoS​ ​in​ ​the​ ​pay​ ​band​ ​of​ ​Rs.​ ​15600-39100​ ​with​ ​Grade​ ​Pay​ ​Rs.​ ​5400,​ ​absorbing​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​into​ ​DoS/ISRO​​with​​liability​​to​​be​​posted​ ​at​​any​​DoS/ISRO​​centre.​​The​​applicant​​executed​​a​​bond​​of​​Rs.​​10​​lakhs​ ​to​ ​serve​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​for​ ​a​ ​minimum​ ​period​ ​of​ ​five​ ​years.​ ​Pursuant​ ​thereto,​ ​the​​applicant​​joined​​SCL,​​Mohali​​on​​03.09.2015.​​At​​the​​time​​of​ ​joining​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant,​ ​SCL​ ​was​ ​under​ ​the​ ​administrative​ ​control​ ​of​ ​DoS,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​appointing​ ​and​ ​disciplinary​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​continued​​to​​be​​DoS/ISRO.​​The​​applicant​​was​​subsequently​​promoted​​as​ ​Scientist​ ​'SE'.​ ​No​ ​disciplinary​ ​proceedings​​or​​adverse​​entries​​have​​been​ ​pointed out against the applicant.​ ​25.​ ​Vide​​Gazette​​Notification​​dated​​07.02.2022,​​administrative​​control​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​of​ ​SCL​ ​was​ ​transferred​ ​from​ ​DoS​ ​to​ ​Ministry​ ​of​ ​Electronics​ ​and​ +05'30' ​10​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​Information​ ​Technology​ ​(MeitY).​ ​Minutes​ ​of​ ​SCL​ ​management​ ​council​ ​meetings​ ​and​ ​subsequent​ ​official​ ​communications​ ​acknowledge​ ​that​ ​officers​ ​recruited​ ​by​ ​DoS​ ​were​ ​being​ ​treated​ ​as​ ​on​ ​deemed​ ​deputation​ ​to​ ​SCL.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​undisputed​ ​that​ ​the​ ​entire​ ​recruitment​ ​process​ ​of​ ​such​ ​officers​ ​was​ ​conducted​ ​by​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​and​ ​not​ ​by​ ​SCL.​​The​​respondents​ ​admit​ ​that​ ​the​ ​issue​ ​of​ ​final​ ​status​ ​of​ ​such​ ​employees​ ​is​ ​still​ ​under​ ​consideration and no final decision has been taken as yet.​ ​26.​ ​Whereas​​the​​applicant​​submitted​​representation​​dated​​02.02.2022​ ​seeking​ ​transfer​ ​to​ ​Satish​ ​Dhawan​ ​Space​ ​Centre​ ​(SDSC),​ ​Sriharikota,​ ​i.e.​ ​a​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​centre,​ ​on​ ​spouse​ ​ground,​ ​the​ ​request​ ​was​ ​recommended​ ​by​ ​Director,​ ​SCL​ ​and​ ​forwarded​ ​on​ ​22.03.2022.​ ​In​ ​July,​ ​2023​​the​​request​​was​​forwarded​​by​​DoS​​to​​MeitY,​​and​​MeitY​​advised​​SCL​ ​to​ ​take​ ​appropriate​ ​action.​ ​The​​respondents​​have​​not​​disputed​​that​​the​ ​transfer​ ​request​ ​was​ ​processed​ ​and​ ​considered​ ​at​ ​multiple​ ​levels,​ ​however,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​has​ ​not​ ​been​ ​issued​ ​a​ ​relieving​ ​order​ ​by​ ​the​ ​appropriate​ ​competent​ ​authority.​ ​In​ ​August,​ ​2024,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​exercised​ ​a​ ​one-time​ ​option​​to​​either​​continue​​at​​SCL​​or​​move​​out​​to​​a​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​centre,​ ​and​ ​the​​applicant​​opted​​to​​move​​out​​with​​preference​ ​for​​SDSC,​​Sriharikota.​​Even​​thereafter,​​no​​posting/relieving​​orders​​were​ ​issued.​ ​The​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​admitted​ ​that​ ​the​ ​issue​ ​qua​ ​transfer/absorption​ ​of​ ​such​ ​officers​ ​is​ ​under​ ​examination​ ​and​ ​no​ ​final​ ​decision has been communicated to the applicant.​ ​27.​ ​The​ ​primary​ ​question​ ​that​ ​arises​ ​from​ ​the​ ​pleadings​ ​is​ ​as​ ​to​ ​whether​ ​the​ ​status​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant​​as​​a​​Central​​Government​​employee​ ​stood​​altered​​merely​​because​​of​​his​​posting/deemed​​deputation​​at​​SCL,​ ​and​ ​whether​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​is​ ​entitled​ ​to​ ​consideration​ ​for​ ​transfer​ ​on​ ​spouse grounds by the competent authority.​ ​28.​ ​Admittedly,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​was​ ​appointed​ ​as​ ​Scientist​ ​'SC'​ ​by​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​and​ ​thereafter​ ​posted​ ​at​ ​SCL,​ ​Mohali,​ ​which​ ​at​ ​the​ ​relevant​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​time​ ​functioned​ ​under​ ​the​ ​administrative​ ​control​ ​of​ ​DoS.​ ​The​ +05'30' ​11​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​appointment​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant,​ ​execution​ ​of​ ​service​ ​bond,​ ​completion​​of​ ​probation,​ ​promotions,​ ​and​ ​disciplinary​ ​control​ ​have​ ​remained​ ​with​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​during​ ​this​ ​period.​ ​Even​ ​after​ ​the​ ​issuance​ ​of​ ​Gazette​ ​Notification​ ​dated​ ​07.02.2022​ ​transferring​ ​the​ ​administrative​ ​control​ ​of​ ​SCL​​to​​MeitY,​​the​​respondents​​have​​themselves​​treated​​the​​applicant​​as​ ​being​​on​​deemed​​deputation,​​and​​no​​order​​of​​permanent​​absorption​​into​ ​SCL has been issued in respect of the applicant.​ ​29.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​settled​ ​that​ ​deputation​ ​does​ ​not​ ​terminate​ ​the​ ​relationship​ ​between​​and​​a​​parent​​department,​​and​​the​​same​​also​​does​​not​​result​​in​ ​loss​ ​of​ ​service​ ​status​ ​unless​ ​there​ ​is​ ​voluntary​ ​absorption.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​present​ ​case,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​no​ ​material​​on​​record​​to​​show​​that​​the​​applicant​ ​ceased​ ​to​ ​be​ ​an​ ​employee​ ​of​ ​DoS/ISRO​ ​or​ ​that​ ​his​ ​service​ ​conditions​ ​were​ ​altered​ ​with​ ​his​ ​consent.​​Mere​​change​​in​​administrative​​control​​of​ ​the​ ​establishment​ ​where​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​was​ ​posted​ ​cannot​ ​by​ ​itself​ ​deprive​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​of​ ​his​ ​status​ ​as​ ​a​ ​Central​ ​Government​ ​employee​ ​under​ ​DoS.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​also​ ​not​ ​disputed​ ​that​ ​spouse​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​is​ ​a​ ​Scientist​​posted​​at​​SDSC,​​Sriharikota,​​which​​is​​a​​DoS/ISRO​​Centre.​​The​ ​request​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​for​ ​transfer​ ​on​ ​spouse​ ​ground​ ​was​ ​duly​ ​submitted,​​recommended​​by​​the​​Director,​​SCL​​and​​thereafter​​processed​ ​and​ ​forwarded​ ​at​ ​various​ ​levels.​ ​The​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​not​ ​placed​ ​on​ ​record​ ​any​ ​speaking​ ​order​ ​rejecting​ ​the​ ​said​ ​request​ ​on​​merits.​​As​​per​ ​record,​ ​it​ ​is​ ​evident​ ​that​ ​the​ ​request​ ​has​ ​remained​ ​pending​ ​for​ ​a​ ​long​ ​period​ ​on​ ​the​ ​ground​ ​that​​the​​issue​​regarding​​status​​of​​SCL​​employees​ ​is under consideration.​ ​30.​ ​This​ ​Tribunal​ ​finds​ ​that​ ​an​ ​individual​ ​request​ ​for​ ​transfer​ ​on​ ​spouse​ ​grounds,​ ​particularly​ ​when​ ​it​ ​has​ ​already​ ​been​ ​processed​ ​and​ ​recommended,​ ​cannot​ ​be​ ​kept​ ​in​ ​abeyance​ ​indefinitely​​merely​​because​ ​a​​general​​policy​​issue​​is​​under​​examination.​​Transfer​​on​​spouse​​grounds​ ​is​ ​a​ ​recognized​ ​aspect​ ​of​ ​Government​ ​Service​ ​as​ ​per​ ​the​ ​relevant​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 ​policies,​ ​intended​ ​to​ ​preserve​ ​family​ ​life​ ​and​ ​human​ ​dignity,​ ​and​ ​the​ +05'30' ​12​ ​(O.A.No.060/991/2025)​ ​same​ ​calls​ ​for​ ​timely​ ​and​ ​reasoned​ ​consideration​ ​by​ ​the​ ​competent​ ​authority.​​At​​the​​same​​time,​​this​​Tribunal​​does​​not​​propose​​to​​substitute​ ​its​ ​own​ ​decision​ ​for​ ​that​ ​of​ ​the​ ​competent​ ​administrative​ ​authority​ ​on​ ​the​ ​question​ ​of​​transfer.​​However,​​the​​prolonged​​inaction​​on​​the​​part​​of​ ​the​​respondents​​despite​​repeated​​representations​​and​​recommendations​ ​is​​arbitrary​​and​​unsustainable​​in​​law.​​The​​ends​​of​​justice​​would​​be​​met​​if​ ​the​ ​competent​ ​authority​ ​among​​the​​respondents​​is​​directed​​to​​consider​ ​and​ ​decide​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of​ ​the​​applicant​​for​​transfer​​on​​spouse​​grounds​​by​ ​passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time bound manner.​ ​31.​ ​In​ ​view​ ​of​ ​the​ ​discussion​ ​hereinabove,​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​being​ ​a​ ​Central​ ​Government​ ​employee,​ ​the​ ​competent​ ​authority​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Department​ ​of​ ​Space/ISRO​ ​i.e.​ ​the​ ​cadre​ ​controlling​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​the​ ​applicant​ ​as​ ​on​ ​date​ ​is​ ​directed​ ​to​ ​consider​ ​and​ ​decide​ ​the​​case​​of​​the​ ​applicant​ ​for​ ​transfer​ ​on​ ​spouse​ ​grounds​ ​to​ ​Satish​ ​Dhawan​ ​Space​ ​Centre,​​Sriharikota,​​in​​accordance​​with​​the​​applicable​​rules,​​policies​​and​ ​guidelines,​​by​​passing​​a​​reasoned​​and​​speaking​​order​​within​​a​​period​​of​ ​six​ ​weeks​ ​from​ ​the​​date​​of​​receipt​​of​​a​​certified​​copy​​of​​this​​order.​​It​​is​ ​made​ ​clear​ ​that​ ​this​ ​Tribunal​ ​has​ ​not​ ​expressed​ ​any​ ​opinion​ ​on​ ​the​ ​merits​ ​of​ ​the​ ​transfer​ ​itself,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​competent​ ​authority​ ​shall​ ​take​ ​an​ ​independent decision in accordance with law.​ ​32.​ ​This​ ​Original​ ​Application​ ​is​ ​disposed​ ​of​ ​in​ ​the​ ​above​ ​terms.​ ​Associated MAs stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.​ ​(RAMESH SINGH THAKUR)​ ​MEMBER (J)​ ​/s/​ 2026.02.02 SHIVAM 16:33:42 +05'30'