Employee On Deputation Entitled To Compensation For Performing Plenary Duties Of Higher Office: J&K&L High Court
The Court held that charge/deputation allowance compensates officials working outside their parent cadre with substantially higher responsibilities.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Justice Sanjay Parihar, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that an employee called upon by the Government to perform the plenary duties of a higher office carrying higher responsibilities is fundamentally entitled to be compensated. The Court clarified that whether such payment is termed charge allowance or deputation allowance, it serves as essential compensation for an official working outside their cadre and performing duties of an office carrying significantly more responsibility than their parent department.
The Court found that while the respondent’s situation might not strictly fall under the technical definitions of Regulation 87 f J&K CSR Volume-I for charge allowance or standard deputation rules, the Government’s direction for him to act in a superior capacity created a right to compensation. Consequently, the Bench affirmed that the appellant-Board could not recover these payments after the respondent had already performed the duties associated with the higher post.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar observed, “…Be that as it may, the fact remains that the respondent was called upon by the Government to perform the plenary duties of a higher office carrying higher responsibilities and, therefore, he was entitled to be compensated. Whether it is termed as charge allowance or deputation allowance, it is, in essence, compensation to the respondent for working outside his cadre and performing duties of a higher office carrying much responsibility than the office he was holding in his parent department”.
Advocate M.I. Dar appeared for the appellants and Advocate Arshad Andrabi appeared for the respondent.
The matter originated from the deputation of Syed Abdul Rouf, an In-charge Chief Education Officer, to the Jammu and Kashmir Board of School Education to serve as In-charge Joint Secretary.
The Board initially sanctioned and paid him a charge allowance based on the difference in pay scales during his tenure. However, in February 2017, the Board issued an order seeking to recover the entire amount paid between 2015 and 2017, asserting that the respondent was not entitled to any charge allowance as his deputation was governed by standard terms and conditions.
The respondent challenged this recovery in the writ Court, which quashed the Board’s order and restrained them from effecting any recoveries. The Board then appealed this decision to the Division Bench, arguing that the allowance was paid erroneously and constituted a loss to the public exchequer. The Board maintained that since the respondent was posted in his "own pay and grade," no additional allowance was permissible.
Therefore, now the Court noted several irregularities in the deputation process, pointing out that Regulation 87 usually applies to promotions under the same employer.
The Bench observed that the Board had granted the allowance on its own without a specific government order. However, the Court held that the respondent had been accepted into the role and had performed the plenary duties of a higher office. The Bench noted that the allowance was, in essence, compensation for higher responsibilities and working outside his cadre.
Accordingly, concluded that it was not inclined to interfere with the writ Court's judgment, although it arrived at the conclusion through its own elaborate reasoning regarding the compensatory nature of the work. The appeal was dismissed, and the interim directions were vacated.
Cause Title: Chairman J&K Board of School Education v. Syed Abdul Rouf and another (Neutral Citation: 2026:JKLHC-SGR:88-D)
Appearances:
Appellants: M.I. Dar Advocate with Laila Khan, Advocates
Respondent: Arshad Andrabi, Advocate.