2020 (4) TMI 915 - SC - Indian Laws

Entitlement to deputation allowance for the period in service with the NDRF - Jurisdiction of High Court to grant relief. Entitlement to deputation allowance for the period in service with the NDRF - HELD THAT - A reading of the judgment in Prasar Bharti v. Amarjeet Singh 2007 (2) TMI 727 - SUPREME COURT makes it clear that deputation envisages the assignment of an employee of one department/cadre/organisation to another department/cadre/organisation in the public interest. It is also clear that normally deputation also involves the consent of the employee. In Prasar Bharti case, this Court also held that on transfer of the services in the case of deputation, the control with regard to the employee would also determine whether such employee was on deputation or not. Till 11.09.2009 the Respondent continued to be under the control of his parent organisation i.e. CISF and was also getting his pay and allowances from the said authority. Therefore, though he as a member of his Battalion may have been serving the NDRF, it cannot be said that he was on deputation to the NDRF. His organisation had agreed to deploy some of its Battalions with the NDRF. However, the administrative and disciplinary control over such employees remained with the CISF. The emoluments were also paid by the CISF and, therefore, it cannot be said that the NDRF was the employer or master of the Respondent. In such circumstances, up to 10.09.2009 the Respondent could not be said to be on deputation even though as per the Rules he may have been described as a deputanionist - However, on 11.09.2009, the date when the Ministry of Home Affairs conferred the command and control of the Battalions drawn from the various Central Para Military Forces with the Director General, NDRF and from which date these personnel drew their pay from the NDRF they would be deemed to be on deputation with the NDRF. Jurisdiction of High Court to grant relief - HELD THAT - The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in matters like this. The High Court exercise its jurisdiction only over State(s) of which it is the High Court. It has no jurisdiction for the rest of the country. Matters like the present may be pending in various parts of the country. In the present case, matter had been decided by the Delhi High Court but some other High Court may or may not have taken different view. The High Court of Madras could not have passed such order. It has virtually usurped the jurisdiction of other High Courts in the country. It is true that sometimes this Court has ordered that all similarly situated employees may be granted similar relief but the High Court does not have the benefit of exercising the power Under Article 142 of the Constitution - The High Court may be justified in passing such an order when it only affects the employees of the State falling within its jurisdiction but, it could not have passed such an order in the case of employees where pan India repercussions would be involved. It is directed that the Respondent shall be paid deputation allowance with effect from 11.09.2009 till 07.10.2011 when he was relieved from service - appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to deputation allowance.
2. Jurisdiction of the High Court in granting relief to all employees.

Summary:

Entitlement to Deputation Allowance:
The Respondent, employed with the CISF since 1999, was sent to the NDRF on 18.04.2008. The Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the Disaster Management (National Disaster Response Force) Rules, 2008, enforced from 11.09.2009, redefined the control and pay structure of NDRF personnel. Initially, personnel from various Central Para Military Forces, including CISF, continued under their parent organizations' control and pay until 11.09.2009. Post this date, they were under NDRF's control and received pay from NDRF. The Respondent sought deputation and special allowances from 18.04.2008, but the Ministry of Home Affairs approved deputation allowance from 14.01.2013. The Delhi High Court, in Brij Bhushan v. Union of India, held that personnel deputed to NDRF were entitled to deputation allowance from their joining date. The Madras High Court, relying on this judgment, granted the Respondent deputation and special allowances. The Division Bench of the High Court upheld deputation allowance but denied special allowance, extending the benefit to all NDRF personnel from 19.01.2006 to 13.01.2013.

Jurisdiction of the High Court:
The Supreme Court noted that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction by granting relief to all NDRF personnel nationwide, as its jurisdiction is limited to its territorial state. The Court emphasized that such orders with pan-India implications should be avoided by High Courts.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, directing that the Respondent be paid deputation allowance from 11.09.2009 to 07.10.2011. The Court also clarified that the Delhi High Court should dispose of the intervenors' petitions based on this judgment. Pending applications were disposed of accordingly.