WP(C) 4076/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. PATHAK The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.09.2008 by which the Mission D irector, SSA released the petitioner who was serving as a District Programme Off icer (DPO) on deputation under SSA. In this petition, the petitioner pointed out that against such release order iss ued by the SSA, a writ petition, being WP(C) Np.2021/2008 was preferred by All A ssam Clustered Resource Centre Coordinator Association which is pending before t he Court. Heard Mr. S. N. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G. Goswami, le arned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. Mr. Goswami, has placed on record the said WP(C)No.2021/2008 along with the othe r connected matters in WP(C) No.5249/2012, which were disposed of by a common or der dated 16.09.2013 passed by this Court, rejecting the claim of the petitioner s for setting aside the release order from their deputation issued by the SSA. In the said judgment the Court held as follows:- 33.Thus, while the process of sending an employee on deputation is consensual, there is no requirement of such consensus in the case of repatriation. A deputat ionist indisputably has no legal right to continue on deputation and he has also no right to claim absorption in the post to which he is deputed. 34. Viewed in the context of the above legal position, claim of the petition ers lacks substance. Petitioner joined service in SSA on deputation for 12 month s. Though they have continued much beyond that period, there is no administrativ e order or decision extending their period of deputation. Reliance placed on Reg ulation 7 of the SSA Service Regulations appears to be misplaced as the said pro vision relates to reversion within the deputation period. The said provision can not be read in a manner to contend that once deputed to SSA, a deputationist can not be reverted back to his parent department unless his service in SSA is found not satisfactory. Thus, petitioners cannot claim as a matter of right that they should be allowed to continue in SSA or that they should be permanently absorbe d in SSA in the absence of any statutory enactment or policy framed in this rega rd. It is also not open to the petitioners to question eligibility qualification s prescribed by SSA for recruitment in SSA on the ground that such qualification shall debar them from competing. SSA being the employer, it is for the SSA to p rescribe the qualifications for the various posts under it as it is the best jud ge of its requirement. Moreover, as per the stand taken, graduation has been pre scribed as the minimum educational qualification for recruitment of CRCC in view of laying down of such qualification as per NCTE norms framed under RTE Act. 35. However, notwithstanding the above, certain grievances expressed by the petitioners which have been taken note of by this Court in the order dated 09-04 -2009 are required to be looked into. As noticed above, as per cabinet decision, term of deputation of teaching and non-teaching staff of elementary and seconda ry education deputed to SSA were regularized. Accordingly, respondents may ensur e that before repatriating the petitioners, the tenure of deputation of all the petitioners to SSA are regularized so that petitioners are not prejudiced in any manner on their repatriation to their parent department. Respondents should als o ensure that the substantive posts held by the petitioners in the parent depart ment are vacant and available for the petitioners to join on repatriation. This petition is fully covered by the said common judgment and order dated 16.09 .2013. In view of the above, nothing survives in this petition. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.