J&K CSR | Employee On Deputation Can Choose Either Deputation Post Pay Or Parent Cadre Pay: J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that an employee appointed on deputation is entitled to elect to draw either the pay in the scale of the deputation post or the basic pay in the pay scale of the parent cadre plus personal pay, if any.The Court further held that the borrowing agency is enjoined to obtain such option from the employee within one month from the date of...
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that an employee appointed on deputation is entitled to elect to draw either the pay in the scale of the deputation post or the basic pay in the pay scale of the parent cadre plus personal pay, if any.
The Court further held that the borrowing agency is enjoined to obtain such option from the employee within one month from the date of joining the deputation post, and that the deputationist shall have the option either to get the pay fixed in the deputation post under normal rules or to draw the pay of the post held in the parent department.
The Court was hearing an intra-Court appeal filed by the Jammu & Kashmir Board of School Education challenging a judgment of a Single Judge, who had quashed the Board's order directing recovery of charge allowance paid to a deputationist employee.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar, while dismissing the appeal, observed,
“.. an employee appointed on deputation is entitled to elect to draw either the pay in the scale of the deputation post or the basic pay in the pay scale of the parent cadre plus personal pay, if any. The borrowing agency is enjoined to obtain such option from the employee within one month from the date of joining the deputation post.”
In the instant case the respondent, Syed Abdul Rouf, was working as In-charge Chief Education Officer in the School Education Department. He was deputed to the J&K Board of School Education to work as In-charge Joint Secretary in his own pay and grade with charge allowance as admissible under rules for a period of six months. The Board issued orders sanctioning his pay and charge allowance.
He was repatriated and later again deputed for a period of two years vide a Government Order in 2015, which stipulated that the deputation would be governed by standard terms and conditions of deputation. The Board sanctioned his pay fixation and charge allowance.
Thereafter, in 2017, the Board issued an order directing recovery of the entire amount of charge allowance paid from 19.03.2015 to 31.01.2017. The respondent challenged the recovery order before the High Court. The Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the recovery order, holding that the respondent was entitled to charge allowance under Regulation 87 of the J&K CSR. The Board appealed.
Court's Observation
The Division Bench examined the relevant provisions of the J&K CSR. Article 22-D of the J&K CSR defines deputation as covering appointments made by transfer of in-service government servants in public interest outside their parent organization on a temporary basis, including deputation to statutory bodies like the Board of School Education.
The Court then referred to Regulation 52-C of the J&K CSR, which prescribes the conditions and terms of deputation. The Court held,
“.. deputation cases involving deputation of a Government servant to a non-Government organization, including corporations, companies, statutory and autonomous bodies within and outside the State, would be governed by the standard terms of deputation contained in Schedule XVIII.”
The Court noted that under Regulation 52-C, the period of deputation cannot exceed three years, extendable by one year, but not exceeding four years at a time. An employee on deputation is entitled to elect to draw either the pay in the scale of the deputation post or the basic pay in the pay scale of the parent cadre plus personal pay, if any. The borrowing agency must obtain such option from the employee within one month from the date of joining the deputation post, the bench underscored.
Regarding the standard terms in Schedule XVIII, the Court observed that the deputationist has the option either to get the pay fixed in the deputation post under normal rules or to draw the pay of the post held in the parent department. However, where the transfer on deputation is not in public interest, the deputationist will continue to draw the pay of the post held in his parent department, the Court explained.
The Court found several irregularities in the deputation. The post held by the respondent in his parent department was much lower than the post of Joint Secretary in the Board. The Court remarked,
“.. strictly speaking, the transfer and posting of the respondent, who was not holding the post of Chief Education Officer on a substantive basis… to the appellant Board for performing the duties of Joint Secretary was not permissible in law. The respondent was neither entitled to the charge allowance nor to the deputation allowance.”
Despite this, the Court noted that the respondent was called upon by the Government to perform the plenary duties of a higher office carrying higher responsibilities and was therefore entitled to be compensated. The Court held,
“.. Whether it is termed as charge allowance or deputation allowance, it is, in essence, compensation to the respondent for working outside his cadre and performing duties of a higher office carrying much responsibility than the office he was holding in his parent department.”
The Court concluded that it was not inclined to interfere with the judgment of the Writ Court, though for the reasons elaborately given in its own judgment. The Court thus dismissed the appeal and vacated the interim directions, upholding the quashing of the recovery order.
Case Title: Chairman J&K Board of School Education v. Syed Abdul Rouf & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL)