The case of National Highway Authority of India (To Be Read As - National Highways Authority Of India.) v/s G Athipathi & Others revolves around the issue of whether the respondent, who had served on deputation as Manager (Technical) in the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), is entitled to have his deputation period counted for promotion to the post of Deputy General Manager (Technical), as per the NHAI's Circular dated 22.05.2017.

The respondent was appointed by the appellant (NHAI) on deputation as Manager (Technical) in 2008. After working for six years, he was repatriated to his parent department (Highways & Minor Ports Department, Government of Tamil Nadu) in 2014. In 2015, he rejoined NHAI on a direct recruitment basis to the same post.

According to NHAI’s recruitment regulations, the post of Manager (Technical) is the feeding cadre for promotion to the position of Deputy General Manager (Technical), with a minimum of four years’ service required. A Circular issued in 2017 provided that service rendered during deputation would be treated as regular service for promotion purposes.

The respondent sought promotion to Deputy General Manager (Technical), arguing that his deputation service should be considered. However, NHAI rejected his claim, citing the gap between his deputation period (2008-2014) and his direct recruitment (2015) as a reason why his deputation period couldn't be counted. The case went through the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and the High Court, both of which sided with the respondent, ordering that his deputation period be considered for promotion.

The appellant argued that the respondent had a gap in service between his deputation and reappointment, and thus, the deputation period could not be considered for promotion. Furthermore, they contended that the Circular was meant for persons who were on deputation and returned to NHAI without a significant gap.

The respondent contended that the Circular did not require a continuous period of service and that the language of the Circular allowed for the consideration of deputation service, regardless of the break in service. He also highlighted that three other candidates in a similar position were granted promotion, while he was unjustly denied.

The Supreme Court, after reviewing the case, emphasized that the key issue was whether the deputation period could be treated as regular service for the purpose of promotion. The Court acknowledged that while the Circular allowed for deputation service to be counted, it was clear that the respondent had been repatriated to his parent department and did not meet the criteria of "absorption" in the NHAI as stated in the Circular. The Court further found that the other three candidates were promoted because they had completed the necessary service requirement while still working with NHAI, unlike the respondent who had a break in service.

The Supreme Court concluded that the respondent’s service after repatriation could not be counted for promotion purposes under the Circular. The promotion could only be granted based on the service from his direct recruitment in 2015, and thus, he did not fulfill the eligibility criteria for promotion to Deputy General Manager (Technical) as of 2017. Consequently, the decision of the appellant not to promote the respondent was upheld. The appeal was allowed, and the CAT’s and High Court’s orders were set aside.