Madhya Pradesh High Court
B.R. Meena vs Union Of India on 24 December, 2018
1
High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur
Bench at Indore
Miscellaneous Petition No.6233/2018
Indore, Dated 24.12.2018
Mr. B.L. Pavecha, learned Senior Counsel along
with Shri Anand Singh Bahrawat, learned counsel for
the petitioner.
Mr. Dharmendra Chelawat, learned counsel for
the respondent / Union of India, on advance notice.
Heard on IA No.5933/2018, an application for urgent hearing and IA No.5934/2018, an application for hearing during winter vacation.
After due consideration, IA No.5933/2018, an application for urgent hearing and IA No.5934/2018, an application for hearing during winter vacation are allowed; and stand disposed of.
Also heard on IA No.5932/2018, an application for stay.
The petitioner, who is an officer of the Central Reserve Police Force working as Commandant in 38 th Battalion, Smailpur, Samba (J&K), was sent on deputation to Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) vide order dated 05.11.2013 (Annexure A/2) for a period of four years, effective from the date on which he takes over the charge. The petitioner joined the NCB on 19.11.2013 (Annexure A/4); and he has been posted as Deputy Director / Zonal Director, NCB, Indore vide order dated 10.12.2013 (Annexure A/5). The NCB vide 2 order dated 08.11.2018 (Annexure A/8) has conveyed the approval of repatriation of the petitioner with effect from 18.11.2018 on completion of his deputation tenure in NCB.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed an original application vide OA No.201/1071/2018 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur; and he did get an interim stay against the said order till final decision of the said original application. Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur vide order dated 18.12.2018 (Annexure P/5) declined to grant interim relief by rejecting the stay application against the impugned order of repatriation.
Shri B.L. Pavecha, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in terms of Office Memorandum dated 22.11.2016, the period of deputation in respect of officers of CRPFs stood revised to seven years deputation tenure in NCB, therefore, the petitioner can be repatriated, after completion of seven years. He also submitted that the petitioner was sent on deputation after following the due selection process. He further submitted that Office Memorandum dated 28.12.2016 (Annexure A/7) has also clarified the policy guidelines dated 22.11.2016; and it is for those officers whose initial deputation period was of three years would automatically be eligible for extension of deputation 3 tenure for seven years, in spite of that the Tribunal has declined the prayer for grant of interim relief. If the impugned order of the CAT is not suspended, then the petitioner will be relieved from the present post; and his Original Application pending before the CAT will turn infructuous. Under these circumstances, he prays for grant of interim relief.
Shri Dharmendra Chelawat, learned counsel for the respondent / Union of India, on advance notice, has submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for extension of deputation tenure up to seven years, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly rejected the prayer.
After considering the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that the operation of the impugned order dated 18.12.2018 (Annexure P/5) shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
In the meanwhile, learned counsel for the respondent / Union of India is directed to file its reply.
Matter be listed in the week commencing 7th January, 2019.
C. c. as per rules.
(S.K. Awasthi) (Subodh Abhyankar)
Vacation Judge Vacation Judge
rcp
Digitally signed by Ramesh Chandra Pithwe
Date: 2018.12.24 16:41:20 +05'30'