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

Share:
fir bail transport pay Fees Public T20 World Cup v Pay Video School company Human Rape Sexual Taxable Evidence Tax Statement property students Policy Bail Bail cheques Police Accident Service Claim Trademark Cognizance smuggling NI Eviction Agreement Minister Acid spa Old Delhi HC MBBS DivorceLand Child Evidence Bail Senior Marriage Maintenance Application Property Exam Evidence Divorce doctrine pocso award Medical public Income Tax constable National bailUniversity Property Recovery Evidence Adopted v Payment territorial corporation Bail liability police bank Constitutionality child nature claim domestic Limitation bsnl traffic property railway legal landlords Relationship Citizen property Tax custody phonetic predicate Acquisition forum public asset tax wire eligibility violence physical financial second trademark person Corpus Director TDS policy entertainment parody games recovery 14 tax judiciary claims court bar 34 Raps advertisement employees salary mother rape decisions students 138 divorce bail CBI fir evidence evidence eviction drc lower doctors legal investigation civil copyright

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.

Legal Context and Petitioners’ Plight:

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.

Detailed Assessment and Court’s Observations:

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.

Conclusion and Directive:

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.

Download Judgment

Share: