T. Ram Reddy, v. Union Of India, Ministry Of Home Affairs,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO Writ Petition No.36582 of 2017 Between:

T. Ram Reddy, S/o T. Bal Reddy, aged 48 years, aged 48 years, Police Constable (Under Deputation), Foreigners Regional Registration Office, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad.

... Petitioner Vs.

Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Represented by its Secretary, New Delhi and 2 others .. Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. A. Rajendra Babu, For Respondents : Mrs. Anjali Agrawal

VRS, J & MGR, J W.P.No.36582 of 2017 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO Writ Petition No.36582 of 2017 ORDER: (V. Ramasubramanian, J) The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging the non-grant of an interim order by the Central Administrative Tribunal, even while admitting the Original Application filed by him.

2. Heard Mr. A. Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. K. Lakshman, learned Assistant Solicitor General takes notice for the respondents.

3. The petitioner, who is working as Police Constable, was placed at the disposal of the Bureau of Immigration, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, for a period of 3 years, in August, 2014. Upon expiry of the period of 3 years, the petitioner wanted extension of the deputation for a further period of 3 years. But the same was refused by an order dated 23-08-2017.

4. Challenging the refusal of the 3rd respondent to grant extension of deputation tenure, the petitioner filed O.A.No.826 of 2017 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal. Though the Tribunal ordered notice in the O.A., it did not grant any interim order. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition.

5. There cannot be an interim order in such matters. The interim order sought by the petitioner was to grant stay of the memorandum dated 23-08-2017. Even if such an interim order is

VRS, J & MGR, J W.P.No.36582 of 2017 granted, it will not enable the petitioner to continue on deputation unless a positive direction had been issued. Since the main issue itself is pending consideration before the Tribunal, the Tribunal can only decide the main issue and we see no reason to interfere with the refusal of the Tribunal to grant the interim order. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J ________________ M. GANGA RAO, J Date: 01-11-2017 Ksn