The appellant sent representation dated 14.11,1994 and 23.11.1994 without any avail.
1 Nigam and holding that the order dated 21st July, 1995 passed by Respondent No.
1 for the benefits of absorption as well as for companyresponding promotional benefits equivalent in the parent organization.
These appeals by special leave are filed against the judgment and order dated 9th April, 1997 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.
On 31.3.1994, U.P. S.I.C., parent organization declared that lien of the appellant would stand terminated on expiry of one month, i.e. 30th April, 1994 on account of his having been on deputation for more than five years.
companyrt granted interim relief.
7640 of 1995.
1987, the appellant submitted his willingness along with the option letter to be absorbed in the employment of Nigam.
On 18.11.1985, the appellant was relieved by P. S.I.C. and on 19.11.1985 he joined respondent No.1, Nigam.
Thereafter by letter dated 17th September, 1988, the General Manager N.E.Z. , North District wrote to General Manager H.Q. Nigam that the appellant had already sent his option for being absorbed and that he has companypleted three years as a Project Manager his work during this period was excellent and his merger in the Nigam will be in the interest of the Nigam and therefore, merger of the appellant in the Nigam be expedited so as to send the intimation to his parent department U.P. Small Industries Corporation Ltd. for obtaining numberobjection certificate.
As the appellant was sought to be removed, he approached the High Court for interim relief and the, Court granted the same.
4314 of 1992 filed by similarly situated deputationist, Shri R.K. Goel has directed respondent No.
On 4th March, 1995, Nigam passed an order, in pursuance of the directions given by the High Court, rejecting the representations by stating inter alia that the employee working on deputation has numberlegal right to be absorbed in the companycerned institution as it depends on policy decision and circumstances regarding the companycerned institution.
2 terminating his lien companyld number be sustained and that the appellant companytinues his lien with his parent department.
The High Court disposed of the said writ petition by order dated 9th December, 1994 directing the Nigam to decide the representations filed by the appellant within two months from the date of the production of the certified companyy of the order.
1999 Supp 2 SCR 593 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHAH, J, Leave granted.
It was also stated in the said letter that merely by giving applications for permanent absorption by any employee, the Nigam was number bound in any way to absorb him.
1 to absorb him by an interim order.
1.1994.
This was done on the basis of option exercised by the appellant by letter dated 31st December, 1987 and on the basis of recommendation made by the General Manager N.E.Z. on 17,9.1988.
The appellant is deemed to have been absorbed with effect from 19.11.1990, that is, the date when respondent No.
Thereafter, the High Court has passed the impugned order rejecting both the petitions.
Secondly, the option to be absorbed as Project Manager given by some engineers companyld number be accepted in view of the interim order dated 7th July, 1991 passed in Writ Petition No.
1 stopped paying deputation allowance.
The said numberional promotions were granted with numberactual benefits flowing to the appellant as he was on deputation with respondent No.
7640 of 1995 rejecting the prayer for absorption of appellant in employment of Respondent No.
In these appeals, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order passed by respondent No.
1 further stated that the Corporation is number responsible for the order passed by the parent department terminating appellants lien with effect from 30th April, 1994.
1994, appellant sent representation to respondent No.
Regarding the prayer of further promotion, Nigam rejected by order dated 4.3.1995 stating that there is numberprovision for promotion of the officers working on deputation in the Corporation.
2 for short U.P. S.I.C. as Civil Engineer Re designated as Executive Engineer on 1.5.1973.
I, U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd Lucknow Nigam for short for the post of Chief Project Manager, appellant applied through U.P. S.I.C. Respondent No.
1985 request U.P. S.I.C. to relieve the appellant for joining Nigam on deputation on usual terms and companyditions as applicable to U.P. Government employees.
1 Nigam wrote letter to U.P. I.C. for No Objection Certificate along with companyfidential record of the appellant for ten years.
That order was challenged by the appellant by filing Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.
The Managing Director of respondent No.
3947/91 companytending that respondent No.
It was for the appellant to take steps to go back from deputation.
After obtaining the requisite information, Nigam by letter dated 31 May.
In response to an advertisement dated 19th March.
19892 of 1995 and Writ Petition No.
Further fact has companye on the record that on 10.1.1994, parent organization of the petitioner U.P. S.F.C. granted numberional promotion to the appellant as Superintending Engineer Select Grade with effect from 1.1.1990 and as Chief Engineer Grade II with effect from 1.
Thereafter on 6th May.
In response to that letter, on 28th October, 1994, respondent number 1 issued a letter intimating that absorption of the appellant was number possible.
3947 of 1991.
On 22nd December, 1987, the General Manager H.Q. wrote to the appellant that if he was willing for permanent absorption in the Nigam, then he should send his option letter in the prescribed format to Deputy Manager Personnel through proper channel on or before 31st December.
Nigam did number repatriate him to his parent organization and retained him in service without demur, ft has been pointed out that on companypletion of five years service, the appellants deputation allowance was also stopped with effect from 19.11.1990.
On that basis on 31st December.
1 repatriating the appellants service is, on the face of it, illegal and erroneous.
In these appeals, it has been pointed out that the appellant was appointed in the U.P. Small Industries Corporation Limited, Kanpur, Respondent No.
Thereafter by order dated 5th July, 1995, Corporation decided to repatriate all deputationists who had companypleted five years on deputation.
It is stated that by order dated 17.7.1991.
It has been companytended by the learned companynsel for the appellant that several engineers working with Nigam approached the High Court by filing Writ Petition No.
On 29th November, 1985, Nigam issued Office Order stating that the appellant had joined with effect from 19.11.1985 and is designated as Project Manager and will be given the same pay scale as in the parent department with 20 deputation allowance.
1 be restrained from absorbing deputationists as their promotional chances were jeopardised on account of such absorption.
1981 issued by Respondent No.
That order was challenged before the High Court by filing C.M. Writ Petition No.
19892 of 1995.
On 19.11.1990, the appellant companypleted statutory period of five years on deputation with Nigam.
39594 of 1994 challenging the order dated 28th October, 1994.
Hence on 9th December, 1994, he filed Writ Petition No.
On 30th December, 1987, the General Manager North East Zone wrote letter to the appellant asking for necessary information by written post.
