Vijay Kumar Vs the Cskhpkv and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vijay Kumar Vs the Cskhpkv and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; respondents directed to recall the services of the petitioner from secondment and repatriate him to his parent department forthwith, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, kept on secondment outside his parent department since 09.06.2011 and not repatriated for more than 15 years despite repeated requests, is entitled to a direction for recall of his services and repatriation to the parent department. +1 more

Court's answer

Applying the principle in Manoj Kumar (CWP No.7639 of 2019) and the parallel direction in Uttam Chand (CWP No.3196 of 2022) to the petitioner's continued secondment for over 15 years without repatriation, the petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to recall the petitioner's services from secondment and repatriate him to his parent department forthwith, preferably within six weeks from receipt of copy of the order.

Ratio / Principle

No Government employee can be sent on secondment basis for an indefinite period; appointment on deputation or secondment basis in another department is always for a limited period, and although absorption under the concerned Recruitment & Promotion Rules can be initiated, the option of the employee concerned is required to be taken.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service law — Secondment/Deputation — Retention for indefinite period impermissible — Petitioner sent on secondment to the office of Divisional Commissioner, Kangra by order dated 09.06.2011 (Annexure P-1) and not repatriated for more than 15 years despite repeated requests — Held, no Government employee can be sent on secondment basis for an indefinite period; deputation/secondment is always for a limited period and absorption under the Recruitment & Promotion Rules requires the option of the employee concerned — Court takes note of Division Bench decision in Manoj Kumar (CWP No.7639 of 2019, decided 15.12.2021) and the direction in Uttam Chand (CWP No.3196 of 2022), and notes parity with Anju Bala, repatriated on intervention of the Chief Minister's office — Writ petition allowed: respondents directed to recall petitioner's services from secondment and repatriate him to parent department forthwith, preferably within six weeks.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.8955 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.06.2025

_____________________________________________________________________ Vijay Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus CSKHPKV, Palampur & Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Rana, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Prince Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No. 2-State.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Arun Rana, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that despite repeated requests, no action is being taken by the respondents for his repatriation to the parent department.

Vide order dated 09.06.2011 (Annexure P-1), petitioner herein was sent on secondment basis to the office of Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh. More than 15 years have passed, but till date, petitioner has not been repatriated to his parent department.

2

In similar facts and circumstances, employee of the respondent No.1-Institute had approached this Court by way of CWP No.3196 of 2022, titled Uttam Chand Vs. Chaudhary Shrawn Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya (Annexure P-2), wherein direction was issued to recall the services of the petitioner forthwith. Apart from above, this Court finds that a similarly situated person namely Anju Bala, who was earlier on secondment basis with the H.P. Board of School Education, has been ordered to be repatriated to her parent department on the intervention of the office of Hon’ble the Chief Minister of H.P.

Needless to say, no Government employee can be sent on secondment basis for an indefinite period. Appointment on deputation or secondment basis in other department is always for limited period. Though in terms of Recruitment & Promotion Rules of department concerned, process can be initiated for absorption of an employee sent on deputation/secondment basis, but even in that case, option is required to be taken from the employee concerned. At this stage, it would be apt to take note of judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.7639 of 2019, titled Manoj Kumar Vs. Chaudhary Shrawan Kumar, H.P. Krishi Vishvavidalaya , decided on 15.12.2021, wherein it was held as under:

“It is rather shocking that the petitioner, who is merely a Beldar, has been kept on secondment basis for over a period of more than 7 years,

3

that too posted at Una, whereas his parent department otherwise would have been the respondent-University. Not only this, a similar situate person one Anju Bala, who was earlier on secondment basis with the H.P. Board of School Education, has been ordered to be repatriated to her parent department, though through the intervention of the office of Hon’ble the Chief Minister of H.P.

2. Why the step motherly treatment has been meted out to the petitioner is not at all forthcoming. After all, no person can be kept on second/deputation, for an indefinite period, that too contrary to her/his wishes.

3. Therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed with a direction to the respondent to recall the services of the petitioner from secondment and repatriate him to his parent department forthwith.”

Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is allowed with the direction to respondents to recall the services of the petitioner from secondment and repatriate him to his parent department forthwith, preferably, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

June 03, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge