HARIT VIMALBHAI BUCH vs THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, JUNAGADH
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6180 of 2026
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR VACATING INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 2 of 2026
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6180 of 2026
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 3 of 2026
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6180 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
================================================================
HARIT VIMALBHAI BUCH
Versus
THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, JUNAGADH & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR HRIDAY BUCH ADVOCATE with
MR MEET A SHAH(9933) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
LAW OFFICER BRANCH(420) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3
MR ANKIT SHAH(6371) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR CHINTAN N DESAI(9940) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 03/11/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of
Constitution of India, 1950, by petitioner praying for following
reliefs:-
"A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
admit and allow the petition;
B. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
declare that the impugned inaction of not
deciding/ considering the case of the
petitioner for permanent absorption in the
Learned Debt Recovery Tribunal - II,
Ahmedabad on the post of Upper Division
Clerk is unjust, improper, illegal, arbitrary,
Page 1 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
and capricious and further be pleased to
issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other
appropriate writ, order or directions to the
respondent no.1 to decide the proposal
dated 18.02.2026 (Annexure-P) of the
respondent no.2 for permanent absorption of
the petitioner in the Learned Debt Recovery
Tribunal - II, Ahmedabad on the post of
Upper Division Clerk;
BB. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
quash and set-aside the communication
dated 28.04.2026 (Annexure - U) of the
respondent no.1 and direct the respondent
no.1 to consider the case of the petitioner
for permanent absorption in the Learned
Debt Recovery Tribunal - II, Ahmedabad on
the post of Upper Division Clerk;
C. Pending admission, hearing and final
disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to direct the respondents to
continue the petitioner on deputation at
respondent no.2 or alternatively, this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to direct the
respondents to decide/consider the proposal
dated 18.02.2026 (Annexure - P) of the
respondent no.2 for permanent absorption of
the petitioner in the Learned Debt Recovery
Tribunal - II, Ahmedabad on the post of
Upper Division Clerk as expeditiously as
possible but before 30.04.2026;
CC. Pending admission, hearing and final
disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to stay the implementation,
operation and execution of the
communication dated 28.04.2026 (Annexure
- U) and further be pleased to direct the
respondents to continue the petitioner on
deputation at respondent no.2;
D. Any other and further relief or reliefs
Page 2 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the
interest of justice and equity in the favour
of the petitioners;"
2. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Chintan Desai waives service
of notice of rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and
learned advocate Mr. Ankit Shah waives service of notice of
rule on behalf of respondent No.2.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hriday Buch with learned
advocate Mr. Meet A. Shah for petitioner, learned advocate
Mr. Ankit Shah for respondent No.2, learned advocate Mr.
Chintan Desai for respondent Nos.1,3.
4. Brief facts of the present case are as under:-
4.1. Pursuant to a vacancy circular dated 19.04.2022 issued
by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department
of Financial Services, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal,
Mumbai, applications were invited for filling up various
vacancies, including the post of Upper Division Clerk at the
Debt Recovery Tribunals at Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Pune,
Aurangabad, and Nagpur on a deputation basis for a period of
Page 3 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
three years. The petitioner applied for the post of Upper
Division Clerk on a deputation basis and was selected for the
said post on 04.08.2022. Upon completion of the three-year
deputation period, the petitioner's request for extension of the
deputation period was rejected. However, the learned Registrar
General of the High Court, vide communication dated
29.08.2025, extended the petitioner's deputation period until
30.04.2026. On 07.02.2026, the petitioner requested
Respondent No. 2 for permanent absorption in its
establishment.
4.2. Thereafter, the proposal was forwarded by Respondent
No. 2 to Respondent No. 1, requesting the issuance of a No
Objection Certificate (NOC) for the petitioner's permanent
absorption in the post of Upper Division Clerk in the
establishment of Respondent No. 2. The learned Registrar
General of the High Court directed the petitioner to comply
with the directions issued vide communication dated
29.08.2025. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with this,
Page 4 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
petitioner approached this Court by way of present petition.
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant (Junior Clerk)
on 20.08.2010 at the District Court, Junagadh. Pursuant to the
vacancy circular dated 19.04.2022 issued by the Government of
India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services,
Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, applications were
invited for filling up various vacancies, including the post of
Upper Division Clerk at the Debt Recovery Tribunals at
Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Pune, Aurangabad, and Nagpur on a
deputation basis for a period of three years. The petitioner
applied for the said post and was selected for appointment as
an Upper Division Clerk on a deputation basis. The petitioner
was granted the benefit of a higher pay scale by Respondent
No. 1. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted to the cadre
of Senior Clerk, Grade III, by Respondent No. 1. However, the
petitioner was reverted on administrative grounds vide office
order dated 17.08.2024.
Page 5 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
6. Thereafter, on 29.04.2025, as the petitioner was
completing three years of deputation, he requested Respondent
No.2 to permit him to continue on deputation. The application
was forwarded to Respondent No.1 for consideration. However,
the request was rejected by Respondent No. 1 on 17.06.2025.
The petitioner again reiterated his request on 30.06.2025,
which was rejected by Respondent No. 1 on 28.07.2025.
Thereafter, the petitioner's request was considered by the
learned Registrar General of the High Court of Gujarat, who,
vide communication dated 29.08.2025, granted an extension of
the deputation period until 30.04.2026. Thereafter, on
07.02.2026, the petitioner requested Respondent No.2 for
permanent absorption in its establishment. Accordingly, on
18.02.2026, Respondent No. 2 forwarded the petitioner's
application to Respondent No.1, requesting the issuance of an
NOC for the petitioner's permanent absorption in the post of
Upper Division Clerk in the establishment of Respondent No. 2.
7. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submitted that
Page 6 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
no departmental proceedings were pending against the
petitioner and that no financial dues were outstanding against
him. It was also submitted that there was no prohibition under
the rules governing the subordinate judiciary of the High Court
that would prevent absorption of the petitioner by the
borrowing department. It is further submitted that sufficient
staff was available in the establishment of the District Court at
Junagadh and that there was no vacancy for the post of Senior
Clerk at Junagadh. Upon the issuance of an NOC by
Respondent No.1, the petitioner's request for permanent
absorption would be considered by the learned Debt Recovery
Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Mumbai, and the proposal would
thereafter be forwarded to the Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.
It was contended that, by refusing to issue an NOC,
Respondent No. 1 had deprived the petitioner of the
opportunity to seek permanent absorption in the establishment
of Respondent No. 2. Except above, no other submissions were
made by learned advocate for petitioner.
Page 7 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
8. Per contra, Learned advocate for Respondent No.1
submitted that petitioner had been serving as an Assistant at
the District Court, Junagadh, since 20.08.2010. Pursuant to the
vacancy circular dated 19.04.2022 issued by the Government of
India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services,
Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, applications were
invited for filling up various vacancies, including the post of
Upper Division Clerk at the Debt Recovery Tribunals at
Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Pune, Aurangabad, and Nagpur on a
deputation basis. The petitioner applied for the said post and
was selected. Accordingly, he was relieved from his duties with
effect from 26.08.2022.
9. It is further submitted that petitioner had been appointed
on a deputation basis and that his request for extension of the
deputation period, made upon completion of three years, had
been rejected. However, the learned Registrar General of this
Hon'ble Court, vide communication dated 29.08.2025, informed
the petitioner that his deputation period had been extended
Page 8 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
until 30.04.2026, and that no further extension would be
granted. Thereafter, the petitioner sought permanent absorption
in the establishment of Respondent No.2, for which an NOC
from Respondent No.1 was required. Respondent No.2
accordingly requested Respondent No. 1 to issue an NOC for
the petitioner's permanent absorption in the post of Upper
Division Clerk. However, the request for issuance of an NOC
could not be accepted for the reason that the policy decision
dated 19.05.2014 governing the absorption of staff in the Debt
Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) and Debt Recovery Appellate
Tribunals (DRATs) stipulates that, in cases involving the
absorption of Upper Division Clerks and Court Masters, the
Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) must, in addition to
the NOC issued by the parent department, consider the likely
eligibility of the feeder cadre. Such consideration must
specifically address whether the absorption of a candidate as
an Upper Division Clerk would adversely affect the promotion
prospects of employees in the feeder cadre.
Page 9 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
10. Therefore, it is submitted that unless the DPC considered
the relevant eligibility criteria, Respondent No. 2 could not
consider the petitioner's request for permanent absorption.
Reliance has also been placed on the Recruitment Rules dated
08.06.2018. It is submitted that the said rules provide for
appointment by promotion and, failing that, by deputation.
There is no provision under the said rules for permanent
absorption of an employee in the establishment of Respondent
No.2. It was, therefore, contended that, upon completion of
the deputation period, the petitioner could not claim any right
to an extension of deputation or permanent absorption. Except
above, no other submissions were made by learned advocate
for respondent No.1.
11. Learned advocate for Respondent No. 2 supported the
case of the petitioner. Reliance was placed on the vacancy
circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of
Finance, Department of Financial Services. It was contended
Page 10 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
that, for appointment to the post of Upper Division Clerk, the
vacancy circular prescribed eligibility for candidates serving as
Lower Division Clerks with eight years of service in the
relevant grade. It was further submitted that, in the absence of
any employee fulfilling the prescribed eligibility criteria, the
petitioner was required to fill the post of Upper Division Clerk
in the establishment of Respondent No. 2. Except above, no
other submissions were made by learned advocate for
respondent No.2.
12. Having considered the submissions canvassed by the
learned advocates for the respective parties and the principles
of service law, it is well settled that an employee does not
have an enforceable right to obtain a 'No Objection Certificate'
for permanent absorption as a matter of course. The settled
position of law is that an employee appointed on a deputation
basis does not possess any fundamental or indefeasible right to
be permanently absorbed in the borrowing department.
Permanent absorption is not a unilateral process; rather, it
Page 11 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
entails a fresh service arrangement requiring the consent of all
three parties, namely, the employee, the borrowing
department, and the lending department.
13. In the present case, the High Court expressly extended
the petitioner's deputation period until 30.04.2026, making it
clear that no further extension would be granted. The
deputation period was, therefore, subject to a definite expiry
date. Upon expiry of the said period, the petitioner's right to
continue in the borrowing department would cease, and he
would ordinarily be required to return to his parent
department. The petitioner may challenge the denial of an
NOC if he establishes that the decision was arbitrary,
unreasonable, discriminatory, or motivated by personal bias or
malice. The petitioner must also demonstrate that the refusal
to issue an NOC violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India
or contravenes any applicable statutory provision. In the
absence of any material establishing mala fides, arbitrariness,
discrimination, or violation of a statutory provision, the
Page 12 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
decision of the parent department to refuse an NOC cannot be
said to be unlawful.
14. The borrowing department's concern regarding a shortage
of staff does not, by itself, confer any legal right upon the
petitioner to seek permanent absorption in the establishment of
the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad. The decision as to
whether an NOC should be issued rests within the domain of
the parent department. Unless such a decision is shown to be
vitiated by mala fides, arbitrariness, or illegality, this Court
would not ordinarily interfere with the discretion exercised by
the parent department.
15. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the
petitioner has failed to establish any legal right to seek the
issuance of an NOC for permanent absorption in the
establishment of Respondent No.2. No grounds warranting
interference by this Court have been made out. Resultantly, the
petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged
Page 13 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026
C/SCA/6180/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240319572026)
accordingly. No order as to costs. Interim relief, if any, stands
vacated forthwith.
16. In view of the disposal of the main matter, connected
Civil Applications do not survive and are disposed of
accordingly.
FURTHER ORDER
After the pronouncement of the order, learned advocate
Mr. Hriday Buch for petitioner has prayed for stay of the order
for four weeks.
On the other hand, learned advocate for the respondent
has objected in granting stay.
In view of above facts and circumstances of the matter,
the order is stayed for a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of this order.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
SHIVANI SHUKLA
Page 14 of 14
Uploaded by SHIVANI SHUKLA(HC02350) on Wed Nov 04 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Nov 04 14:37:16 IST 2026