-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has held that the repatriation of an employee during the probation period is valid. The apex court emphasized that once an employee resumes duty at their parent department after repatriation, they cease to be an employee of the organization from which they were repatriated. The judgment was delivered in the case of National Technical Research Organization & Others vs. Dipti Deodhare (Civil Appeal No. 413 of 2023).
The Supreme Court stated, "Once the respondent was repatriated and resumed duty at DRDO, she ceased to be an employee of NTRO. Repatriation during the probation period was deemed valid." This ruling clarifies the legality of repatriation during an employee's probation period and settles the question of their employment status.
Furthermore, the Court addressed the issue of pensionary benefits and terminal benefits. The respondent in the case, who held the position of Scientist 'H' in DRDO, claimed consequential benefits and past service benefits based on that post. However, since the respondent had not completed her probation period as Scientist 'H' in NTRO, the Court held that terminal benefits should be calculated based on the post from which the respondent was discharged, namely Scientist 'G' in DRDO.
The Supreme Court stated, "Pensionary benefits should be calculated based on the post from which the respondent was discharged, which in this case was Scientist 'G' in DRDO." This decision clarifies the calculation of terminal benefits for employees who are repatriated during their probation period.
In a separate aspect of the case, the Court permitted the respondent to press her voluntary retirement application. The application would be evaluated by DRDO, considering her position as Scientist 'G'. If the respondent chooses to pursue voluntary retirement, she would be entitled to the benefits available for retirement as Scientist 'G' in DRDO.
The Court also highlighted the discretion of employees regarding the continuation of their lien on a substantively held post. The employer cannot compel an employee to exercise their lien. In this case, the respondent had the option to maintain her lien on the post of Scientist 'G' in DRDO, and her repatriation did not affect her lien rights.
The Supreme Court's judgment quashed and set aside the previous judgment of the High Court, reinstating the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The High Court had directed the treating of the repatriation order as an order of discharge simpliciter and granting consequential benefits as Scientist 'H'. The Supreme Court found these directions to be inconsistent and unsustainable.
Date of Judgment: February 17, 2023
National Technical Research Organization & Others vs Dipti Deodhare
