PRASAR BHARATI versus AMARJEET SINGH AND ORS.

Citation: [2007] 2 S.C.R. 160 · Decided: 02-02-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
PRASAR BHARA TI 
v. 
AMARJEET SINGH AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 2, 2007 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KA TJU, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990-ss. l l (1) 
C and (5)-Transfer of employees serving in Akashwani & Doordarshan to the 
appellant-Corporation-No formal order of deputation passed-Corporation 
passed orders of transfer of staff on pretext of optimally utilizing manpower 
to make every Station and Kendra fully functional-Legality of transfer 
orders challenged-Held: indisputably employees working with Corporation 
D for a long time without any demur-They being paid salaries and other 
remuneration by Corporation and subjected to effective control by its ofjicers-
Hence, by reasons of conduct of employees as well as Union of India and 
Corporation, they are deemed to be deputed in services of Corporation and 
governed by general principles of deputation, which in peculiar facts and 
circumstances of case, would imply that Corporation had power of transfer-
E The action taken by Corporation in transferring the employees was not 
arbitrary or irrational as the same was in the interest of administration 
and with a view to carry on its functions-Further, the rights of employee 
cannot be allowed to remain uncertain for a long time, thus in exercise of 
jurisdiction under Art. 142, under Union of India directed to take firm 
p decision u!s. 11(1)-- Constitution of India, 1950-Arts.235, 142. 
'f-. 
Words and Phrases: 'Transfer' and 'Deputation'-Distinction between-
Discussed 
Respondents were employees of 'Doordarshan' and 'Akashwani'. 
G · Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) was established by 
promulgation of Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation oflndia) Act, 1990. 
S.11(1) of the Act provides that it shall be lawful for the Central Government 
to transfer to the Corporation any of the officers or other employees serving 
in the Akashvani and Doordarshan and engaged in the performance of those 
functions, where the Central Government has ceased to perform the functions. 
H 
160 
/ 
PRASAR BHARA Tl v. AMARJEET SINGH 
161 
S.11(5) provided that every officer/employee transferred by order under A 
s.15(1) would within 6 months from date of transfer exercise his option to be 
governed by condition enumerated therein and once transferred to the 
Corporation, they cease to be employees of Central Government and would 
become employees of Corporation. 
However, no order of deputation in respect of any of the employees or B 
officers of the Doordarshan or Akashvani was passed. The officers and 
employees of erstwhile Akashvani and Doordarshan, however, continued to 
l 
work with the Corporation. They drew their salaries and other remunerations. 
The same terms and conditions of their services were continued to apply to 
them as if they were the Central Government employees. 
The Corporation passed orders of transfer of the operational and 
administrative staff on the ground of optimizing the manpower available so as 
to make every station and kendra fully functional. Aggrieved Respondents 
successfully challenged the legality of orders of transfer before CAT. 
c 
Appellant filed writ petition which was dismissed by the High Court. 
D 
In these appeals the question for consideration is whether in the 
peculiar facts of the case, the Corporation had power to transfer the employees 
who althc.ugh were working in its establishment but continued to be the 
employees of the Central Government. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. This case raises practical problems which is the creation of 
Union of India and the appellants. It is difficult to comprehend as to why the 
Union of India did not exercise its statutory functions for such a long time. It 
E 
was obliged to take a decision one way or the other. It was for the Union of F 
India to transfer the officers or employees of the Doordarshan and Akashvani 
to the Corporation. In such an event, the employees could have exercised their 
option as envisaged under sub-section (5) of s.11 of the Act. The transfer of 
an employee deputed under s.l 1(1) is that of a permanent nature. So long an 
order under sub-section (1) is not passed, the employees and officers would G 
continue to be the employees of the Central Government. They shall unless 
otherwise an order is passed would be governed by the terms and conditions 
of services evidenced by the rules framed by the President of India under 
proviso appended to Art

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.