Seniority
pradeep
(Querist) 26 July 2015
This query is : Resolved
I am serving as Junior Engineer (Civil) in border security force. I was joined in BSF during Jan 1996 and served in Communication Branch upto Apr 2005. While in Communication Branch of BSF in the rank of HC, being a Civil Engineering diploma holder , I have been selected for deputation to the rank of SI in Engineering Branch (Civil ) of same department during May 2005 which was one rank higher than I holding in my parent cadre . As per my deputation order, the deputation was year to year basis and further after completion of my 3 year 4 months deputation period I have absorbed to Engineering Branch as SI . During the period of my deputation , 18 personnel has been enrolled by direct recruitment against vacancies without absorbing me when sufficient vacancies were existing and as per RR filling of vacancies will be at 60:40 ratio (Direct rectt: deputation/absorption) .Department said I was to complete 3 years in deputation for further absorption but previously in similar cases the person who were in deputation in Engineering (Ele) section were absorbed in 14 months,16months,24 months etc. Now , all the 18 pers who were recruited after I appointed as SI on deputation are my seniors as per existing CSR when they have less experience in Engineering cadre as well as in BSF. Moreover, some of them are trained under me.
My complaint against our department (BSF) is that, they did not absorbed me after my minimum required period of deputation as applied to others when there were sufficient vacancies which made Junior to many persons who are still having less experience.
I know the rule (7) of Seniority in CSR that, normally the Seniority will be considered from the date of absorption, but my question is if I am not repatriated to my cadre and am performed duties satisfactorily as same as my seniors who are in the same cadre and I ever 100 % responsible for all the work I have done during my deputation period , what is the logic I am not giving Seniority than the people who are joined after I joined in the same cadre on deputation.
Considering Seniority rule also, if I absorbed by the department after completion of one year deputation instead of 3 yrs 4 months , I may get Seniority above the personnel joined after that time.
Please suggest any way out to get Seniority from the date of my deputation .
P. Venu
(Expert) 27 July 2015
What are the conditions/eligibility for absorption of those on deputation?
Guest
(Expert) 27 July 2015
Dear Pradeep,
On the given facts, your claim for seniority is established only from the date of absorption in the BSF. In the present scenario, if the deputation was on year to year basis, as per the duly prescribed conditions of your deputation, you cannot claim absorption and seniority from back date at administrative level of the BSF.
However, the following two elements seems to be favourable to you:
1) In normal course deputation should not exceed one year after which the borrowing department has to repatriate the deputationist to his parent department. Extension of deputation, although is normally subject to approval of the lending department, but should also be with the consent of the deputationist; and
2) Other deputaionists were absorbed in 14 months, 16months, 24 months.
On these grounds you can seek justice from the competent court of law for absorption from back date.
But, before going to court, you will have to weigh pros & cons from all angles by consulting in person by showing him all your papers pertaining to your deputation, absorption, including the orders of absorption of others, which you have cited.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 27 July 2015
Your claim has some merits, first move through the departmental avenues by submitting representations and afterward move legally if no result from departmental avenue comes out.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 31 July 2015
Competing the rule of seniority with the parent cadre/establishment is different to that when an employee is on deputation. Directly recruited personnel shall have seniority vis-Ã -vis promotion on the basis of vacancies available, which cannot be claimed and allocated to the individual/ employee on deputation and his/her seniority shall start afresh from the date of final absorption with the borrowing department. However, parent department (lending) shall have to maintain seniority vis-Ã -vis promotion of its employee on deputation.
pradeep
(Querist) 31 July 2015
But what about different period of deputation for absorption...?
Biswanath Roy
(Expert) 01 August 2015
I agree with the views of Learned Senior Expert Mr. P.S. Dhingra which is a valuable one.
Guest
(Expert) 01 August 2015
Mr. Pradeep,
Your query, "But what about different period of deputation for absorption...", is quite irrelevant on legal angle. Discretion of the competent authority is always there. You cannot challenge, as the utility of services of the deputationist is the prime consideration for the satisfaction of the management/ administration before issuing order for absorption.
However, for your satisfaction, you may ask this question from the authorities of the BSF through RTI, if that is a must for you to know.
Guest
(Expert) 01 August 2015
Biswanath ji,
Thanks for agreeing with my views.
pradeep
(Querist) 01 August 2015
To assess the performance of a deputationist or a permanent employee , provision of Annual Confidential Report is there, which will tell the satisfaction level of seniors . In my case, I got 1 Very good and 2 outstanding report in my 3 year ACR but nobody is concerned about that.
Guest
(Expert) 01 August 2015
What is the use of stretching the thread with baseless non-legal arguments.
Where was the need for extending the thread unnecessarilily, when I have already asked you to ask such questions from the management through RTI. Experts cannot be treated as their representative to solve your administrative doubts on behalf of the management.
If not satisfied with the action of the management, why not approach the competent court of law to prove your point against the management? I have already provided you sufficient guidance points, including my views about on time gap in absorption of other deputationists.
But, your vague argument reiminds me about another Pradeep Kumar, with used to represent with different fake identies. He was also used to extend the threads with his vague arguments in the same fashion and style like you. Only such type of useless time wasting arguments reveal, as if the querist has put forth some hypothetical problem, as a law student, not being his own real problem.
