Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

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