Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Similar News