IJAZ ANW AR. J. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 with the following prayers: "On acceptance of this writ petition an appropriate writ may kindly be issued by declaring the impugned order/letter dated 23.11.2021 whereby the petitioner was repatriated to his parent Department may kindly be declared as illegal, unconstitutional and ineffective upon the rights of petitioner and may kindly be set aside.
That the respondents may kindly be directed not to repatriate the petitioner from Institute of Kidney Disease, Hayatabad, Peshawar till completion of his deputation period.
Any other remedy which this august Court deems fit that may also be awarded in favour of the petitioner ."
2. The petitioner herein, being the employee of the respondent No.2 was sent on deputation for a period of 03 years to the Institute of Kidney Diseases, Hayatabad, Peshawar vide letter dated 24.1.2019. He is aggrieved of the letter of Director , Institute of Kideney Diseases, Hayatbabad, Peshawar dated 23.11.2021, whereby he was relieved and his services were placed at the disposal of Accountant General for further posting.
3. Arguments heard and record gone through.
4. Perusal of record reveals that initially , vide letter No.99/CGA.Estt/Dep-2/2017 dated 24.01.2019, petitioner being a civil servant serving in the Controller General of Accounts, Islamabad was sent on deputation for a period 03 years to the Institute of Kidney Diseases, Hayatabad, Peshawar . He has impugned the letter dated 23.11.2021 whereby the Director , Institute of Kidney Diseases, Hayatabad, Peshawar has relieved him and directed to report to the Accountant General Office. The counsel for petitioner has questioned the validit y of the order on the ground that the order carries allegation against him and is a stigma which, without providing right of hearing cannot be passed.
5. We understand that in the order , it has been specified that petitioner has failed to complete the requisite job as required by the Departmental Accounts Committee, as such, he was relieved. However , we find that it is within the domain of the borrowing department to relieve the civil servant at any time if they are not satisfied with his performance and for relieving such deputationist, no departmental proceedings are required. Even otherwise, petitioner being a civil servant posted on deputation in the Institute of Kidney Diseases, he can only be proceeded departmentally by his parent department, if there is any such allegation even in the office of borrowing department against him. It is by now well settled that a deputationist has no vested right to remain on the post as deputationist for ever or for the stipulated period. He can be ordered to be repatriated to the parent department at any time without assigning any reasons. In absence of any specific provision of law, deputationist could not ask to serve total period of deputation and he could be repatriated being a deputationist by competent authority in the interest of exigencies of service as and when so desired and such order of competent authority could not be questioned.
Period of deputation could at the best be equated to that of an expression of maximum period which could be curtailed or extended by competent autho rity and no legal or vested rights were available to a deputationist to serve his entire period of deputation in borrowing department.
6. It is a matter of practice and common experience, that officers of the Provincial cadres deputed for service at the Centre are frequently recalled by their Province, by the Provincial Government, in the exigencies of the public service. Against such a recall they have no right of any kind to object, being substantively officers of the Provincial Government and only on deputation to the Centre.
7. It may be noted that the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the Contempt proceedings against the Chief Secretary and others 2013 SCMR 1752 and Ali Azhar Khan Baloch and others v. Province of Sindh and others 2015 SCMR 456 deprecated unnecessary deputation and stressed that resort to deputation can only be made in extreme cases of exigencies of service and on account of non-availability of relevant expertise in the department.
In above cases, it has been ordained that deputationist does not have any vested right to remain posted for an indefinite period and that the parent department is free and at liberty to recall its officers as and when exigencies of service so require and, likewise, the borrowing department cannot be held hostage to the period of deputation and can send the deputationist back if the exigencies of service or the public interest so demand or even on administrative grounds. There can be no cavil to the proposition that the employer has the right and authority to terminate the deputation period or repatriate the employee back to his/her parent department. It is settled principle that a deputationist does not have any vested right to remain on the post for ever or for a stipulated period. He can be ordered to be repatriated to the parent department at any time without assigning any reason.
8. In view of the above referred judgements of the superior courts, a deputationist does not have any statutory right to claim completion of his deputation period and such tenure can be curtailed at any time at the instance of either borrowing or lending department.
9. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that petitioner has got no right whatsoever to impugn the relieving order . Besides, it in no manner has effected the terms and conditions of his service rather he has been sent back to his parent department. This petition being bereft of merit is accordingly dismissed. S. Masood Abbas Rizvi Vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Establishment and others 2014 SCMR 799 . Dr. Shaft ur Rehman Afridi Vs C.D.A Islamabad through Chairman and others.2010 SCMR 378 . Pakistan Vs Fazal Rahman Khundkar and another PLD 1959 SC (Pak) 82 . Senate Secretariat through Chairman and another v . Miss Faiqa Abdul Hayee 2014 SCMR 522 . S. Masood Abbas Rizvi Vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Esta blishment and others 2014 SCMR 7991 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5