Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Quashing of Impugned Letters and Restoring Non-Practicing Allowance to Qualified MBBS Professors: A Directive of Justice and Rationality- Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court, in a landmark judgment pronounced by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, has upheld the rights of MBBS qualified professors at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) to receive Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA). The judgment quashed several impugned letters and directed the University to restore and pay arrears of NPA to the petitioners, dating back to January 2017.

The petitioners, all qualified MBBS doctors employed as Assistant Professors at JNU, approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. They sought redressal against the withdrawal of their NPA and demanded the restoration and payment of arrears. The allowance, initially granted, was abruptly halted and attempts were made to recover the amounts previously paid.

Eligibility for NPA: The Court acknowledged the petitioners’ eligibility for NPA based on their MBBS qualifications, which are recognized as essential for their appointments.

Jurisdiction of University’s Executive Council: The decision to withdraw NPA was deemed invalid by the Court, citing the lack of an appropriate resolution from the University’s Executive Council.

Reference to Repeated Amendments: The Court referred to various amendments and rules under which NPA was instituted and revised, emphasizing the consistent recognition of NPA for positions requiring medical qualifications.

Rationale Behind Granting NPA: The judgment reiterated that NPA was an incentive for doctors in lieu of private practice and that merely being in a non-clinical role does not invalidate this allowance.

Comparison with Other Institutions: It was noted that similar institutions across the country continue to provide NPA to positions demanding an MBBS degree, reinforcing the petitioners’ case.

The High Court directed JNU to restore the NPA to the petitioners and pay the arrears from January 2017 onwards. In the event of a delay beyond six weeks, the University will owe a simple interest of 6% per annum on the due amounts.

Date of Decision: April 3, 2024

PROF DR. MOHAN RAO & ORS. Vs. JAWARHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY & ORS.

 

Latest Legal News