Police Have No Power To Probe Or File Chargesheet Under PCPNDT Act: Supreme Court Rules Cognizance Bar Absolute 'Cannot Claim Pension Scheme Post-Retirement After Accepting CPF Benefits': Supreme Court Rules Regularisation Doesn't Relate Back To Initial Appointment 'Offence Within Four Corners Of Room Not In Public View': Supreme Court Quashes SCST Act Charges Against School Manager Give A Dog A Bad Name And Hang Him: Supreme Court Quashes UP Gangsters Act Cases; Rules Punishing Mere Status Violates Article 20(1) Child Of Tender Age Easy Prey To Tutoring: Supreme Court Quashes Double Murder Conviction Based On Solitary Child Witness 'State Cannot Supplant PSC's Role By Conducting Exhaustive Eligibility Enquiry': Supreme Court Limits Executive Power In Post-Selection Document Verification Revenue Entry Neither Creates Nor Extinguishes Title: Supreme Court Holds Limitation Against Co-Owner Cannot Run Without Open And Unequivocal Ouster 125 CrPC | Obligation To Maintain Children Cannot Be Divided By Arithmetic Alone': Supreme Court Rules Mother's Income No Ground To Halve Father's Liability 'Scramble For Possession': Supreme Court Directs Appointment Of Advocate Receiver Amid Clash Between Consent Decree Execution & Gujarat Tenancy Act Claims 'Enmity Is A Double-Edged Weapon': Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Convicts After Medical Evidence Flaws Expose 'Eye-Witness' Lies Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Remand Extension Granted Without Notice To Accused, Grants Default Bail 167(2) CRPC No Violation Of Natural Justice If Borrower Fails To Produce Records Or Seek Personal Hearing: Calcutta High Court Upholds Bank's 'Fraud' Account Classification Cannot Exploit Entire Land's FAR For New Tower Once OC Is Issued Without Flat Owners' Consent: Karnataka High Court Mandates TDR Purchase Brethren Assembly Hall Is A 'Church' Under Foreign Liquor Rules, Bar Hotel Cannot Function Within Prohibited Distance: Kerala High Court Fence-Sitters Cannot Claim Arrears After Inordinate Delay, But Entitled To Notional Fixation For Pension: Madhya Pradesh High Court Strikes At The Foundation Of Institutional Integrity: Punjab And Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail In Medical PG Admission Fraud Case Foreign Law Degree Taken Directly After School Cannot Be Treated As 'First Degree' For Admission To 3-Year LL.B. In India: Bombay High Court Supreme Court Relaxes 3-Year Bar Practice Rule For Civil Judge Entry, Introduces 1-Year Practice & Clerkship Model

Repatriation of Deputy Registrar Arbitrary and Without Jurisdiction: Punjab and Haryana High Court directing immediate reinstatement of Dr. Veena Singh

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the repatriation order of Dr. Veena Singh, who was serving as Deputy Registrar at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Law University, Sonepat. The court ordered her immediate reinstatement, highlighting the arbitrary nature of the repatriation and the failure to adhere to statutory provisions.

Dr. Veena Singh was appointed as Principal at Government Senior Secondary School under the Department of Secondary Education through direct recruitment on July 22, 2008. On September 24, 2020, she was deputed as Deputy Registrar to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Law University. Her appointment was initially for one year, extendable up to three years. Following satisfactory service and a recommendation from the Executive Council, she was absorbed as a permanent employee on March 2, 2021. Despite this, an order dated March 1, 2024, repatriated her back to her parent department, which she challenged in court.

The High Court noted that the initial deputation and subsequent absorption of Dr. Veena Singh were conducted following due process. "No infirmity was found in her appointment by the competent authority after obtaining NOC from the cadre controlling authority," the judgment states. The Executive Council's resolution dated September 10, 2022, which permanently absorbed Dr. Singh, was never modified or recalled.

The court observed that the repatriation order was passed arbitrarily, treating Dr. Singh as still on deputation despite her absorption as a permanent employee. "The decision taken by the highest executive authority, approving her absorption in University service, was overruled and violated by the Registrar, under orders of the Vice-Chancellor," the judgment noted.

The court emphasized that the Executive Council (EC) is the chief executive authority of the university and has all necessary powers to administer the institution. The Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar are bound to comply with the EC's decisions. The impugned order was passed without the necessary approval from the EC and was therefore deemed illegal and without jurisdiction. The court highlighted that even in the absence of three nominated members, a meeting could have been held as the quorum required is one-third of the EC members.

Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya remarked, "The impugned order of repatriation, dated 01.03.2024, has arbitrarily treated the petitioner as a deputationist, ignoring the decision taken by the highest executive authority approving her absorption in University service."

The High Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and respecting the decisions of the Executive Council in university administration. The ruling mandates the immediate reinstatement of Dr. Veena Singh as Deputy Registrar and directs the university to allow her to resume duties without delay. The court also awarded litigation costs of ₹1,00,000, to be paid by the Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar from their own pockets, reflecting the gravity of the procedural lapses.

Date of Decision: July 11, 2024

Dr. Veena Singh vs. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Law University, Sonepat

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Legal News