In Brief
The appellants challenged the deputation appointment and subsequent absorption of respondent no. 4 as Project Engineer (Electrical) in NOIDA, arguing it violated service regulations that prescribed percentages for direct recruitment and promotion for Group 'A' posts. The Supreme Court held that Regulation 16(1)(c) explicitly permits deputation as a source of recruitment, and must be read harmoniously with provisions on percentages. The Court found the appellants lacked the required 8 years' experience as Assistant Project Engineer and therefore had no locus standi. Additionally, the Court relied on prior precedent holding that an absorbed employee cannot be left in a liminal position between authorities. The appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.