In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India clarified that deputation service cannot be counted towards promotion eligibility if there is a break in tenure or a subsequent fresh appointment. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, overturned previous orders by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and the Madras High Court that had favored the respondent, G. Athipathi, against the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).
The verdict emphasizes the importance of uninterrupted service for promotion eligibility under government regulations, setting a precedent for similar disputes involving deputation and direct recruitment in public sector organizations.
Case Background
The case originated from a dispute between NHAI and G. Athipathi, a government employee who transitioned between roles through deputation and direct recruitment.
– Initial Appointment: Athipathi, initially an Assistant Engineer in Tamil Nadu’s Highways Department, joined NHAI on deputation as Manager (Technical) in 2008.
– Repatriation and Recruitment: After serving six years, he returned to his parent department in 2014 but was later directly recruited back to NHAI in 2015 for the same position.
– Promotion Dispute: Athipathi’s bid for promotion to Deputy General Manager (Technical) was denied by NHAI, citing a gap in service and fresh recruitment. Aggrieved, he approached CAT, which ruled in his favor. This decision was subsequently upheld by the Madras High Court, prompting NHAI to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court.
Legal Issues
The Supreme Court was tasked with resolving two key legal issues:
1. Deputation as Regular Service: Whether service on deputation could qualify as regular service for promotion under NHAI’s regulations.
2. Break in Service: Whether Athipathi’s repatriation to his parent department constituted a break in tenure, disqualifying his deputation period from consideration for promotion.
Supreme Court Observations
The bench meticulously examined the provisions of NHAI’s recruitment regulations and a critical Circular issued on May 22, 2017, which allowed deputation service to be treated as regular service for promotion under specific conditions.
Key observations included:
– Continuous Tenure Requirement: The Court ruled that the benefit of deputation service was conditional upon uninterrupted service within NHAI. “Deputation service cannot be considered if there is a break in tenure or a subsequent fresh appointment,” the bench stated.
– Fresh Appointment Impact: The Court held that Athipathi’s direct recruitment in 2015 reset his eligibility timeline. “The clock for promotion eligibility begins anew for fresh recruits,” the judgment emphasized.
– No Universal Application of Deputation Tenure: Clarifying the intent behind the 2017 Circular, the bench observed that its provisions applied only as a one-time measure to address prolonged litigation and promote fairness among serving employees. It did not extend to cases like Athipathi’s, where a substantial gap in service existed.
Decision
The Court determined that Athipathi’s deputation service from 2008 to 2014 was a completed tenure with no continuity upon his repatriation. His subsequent re-entry into NHAI through direct recruitment in 2015 constituted a fresh appointment, making him ineligible for promotion until completing the requisite four years of continuous service in his new role.
The bench observed, “The difference between a deputationist and a regular employee must be obliterated only when both are in continuous service. Allowing a break in service to count would create arbitrary and unfair advantages.”
Consequently, the Court upheld NHAI’s decision to deny promotion, reversing the orders of CAT and the Madras High Court.
