HiGH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BILASPUR DIVJSION BENCH CORAM : HON'BLE SHRS H.L. DATTU,CJ. HON'BLE SHRED.R. DESHIVEUKH, J. APPELLANT (Petjtloner) RESPONDENTS (Non-aepljcants) WrEt Aprteal No.78 of 2007 Yogesh Kurnar Vishwakarma, S/o late Shri G.R. Vishwakarma, aged about 30 years, R/o C/o Shri Shiv Kumar Vishwakarma, Quarter No.P-3, Section 1, Houslng Board Coiony, Shankar Nagar Raipur (C.G.) Versus 1. / State of Chhattisgarh - through the Secretary, Housing & Environment Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Tne Deputy Secretary, State of Chhattisgarh, Housing & Environment Department DKS Bhavan, Raipur 3. The Secretary, Genera! Administration Department, State of Chhattisgarh, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.O 4. The Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission - through the Secretary, Shankar Nagar Raipur (C.G.) 5. The Chhattisgam Housing Board, through jts Commissioner, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (QG.) VVrit appeal under Ruie 157(10) read with 2(1) of Hlah Court pf_ChhMlsgarh (ApDea! to DiyLsion Benohsl20Q6 Present: Shri P.Div^akar, Sr. Advocate with Shri P.R. Patankar, counsel for the appefiant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 18t"ApriS, 2007) The foiiowing ora! order ofthe Court was passed by H.L. CJ. This appea! arises out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 1194 of 2007, dated 28-02-2007. (2) The appeliant before us was working in the Department of Housing and Environment as regular empioyee. He was deputed to work in Pubiic Service Commission by an order passed by the Competent Authority. While he was sen//ing as deputationist, the Competent Authority of Housing and Environment Department has passed another order repatriating the sen^ices of the appeliant to the parent department. Aggrieved by the said order, the appeiiant v^as before this Court in W.P. No. 1194 of 2007. (3) Learned Singie Judge has rejected the writ petition by his order dsted 28-02-2007. !t is the correctness or otherwise of the said order is the subject matter of this writ appeal. (4) Shri P.Diwakar, learned Sr. oounsel appearing for the appeiiant would submit that the Public Service Commission is about to pass an order to absorb the sen/ices of the appellant and therefore, iearned Single Judge ought not to have rejected the vi/rit petitson. (5) The deputationist as a matter of right cannot contend that he shouid be absorbed in the place v^here he is posted as deputationist. Hls services wltl always remain in the lien of the parent department The Competent Authority of the parent department in exigency of the services can pass an order repatriating the deputationist to the parent department. The iaw on the point is \A/el! settled by catena of decisions of the Apex Court. Repetition of the same is not necessaryfor the purpose ofdisposal ofthis vy?rit appeai. (6) !n view of the above, we are of the firm opinion that the learned Single Judge has not committed any error what-so-ever, which would call for our interference. Therefore, the appeai requjres to be rejected. in our opinion, if iiberty is reser\/ed to the appeliant to make a representation before the parent department to continue hls ser^ices as deputatlonist in the ser\/ice of Public Semce Commission, no prejudice wouid be caused to anyone of the parties. Therefore, whiie rejecting the writ appeat, we direct the appellant to make appropriate representation before the Competent Authority of the Housing and Environment Department to continue his services as deputationist in the Public Sepv/ice Cornmission, so that the Pubiio Sen/ioe Commisslon would be in a positlon to pass an appropriate order to absorb the semces of the appeliant. it is needless to state that the Competent Authority of the Housing and Environment Department would consider the same in accordance with law. (7) With these obsen/ations, the writ appea! stands disposed of. Ordered accordingty. j Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge /\ !»-'