Heard Sri Sudeep Seth learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sridhar Awasthi learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Satyanshu Ojha learned counsel appearing for opposite parties.
Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of learned counsel for parties.
Under challenge is the order dated 22nd November, 2019 passed by Director (Administration & Monitoring), of the university concerned terminating services of petitioner.
Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that a perusal of the impugned order itself will indicate that it is completely non speaking in nature and has been passed without application of mind. It has been submitted that earlier petitioner has been chargesheeted for certain misconduct and inquiry proceedings had ensued. It has been submitted that thereafter purportedly an inquiry report had been submitted following which a show cause notice was also issued to petitioner. Due to the fact that a copy of the inquiry report was not furnished to the petitioner, he made representations seeking a copy of the inquiry report in order to enable him to furnish a reply to the show cause notice. It has been submitted that despite the said representations, a copy of inquiry report was never provided to the petitioner whereafter the impugned order has been passed.
Learned counsel for petitioner has also raised challenge to the impugned order on the ground that it has been passed without jurisdiction since appointing authority of petitioner in terms of Section 12(8) of Uttar Pradesh Krishi Evam Praudogik Viswavidyala Adhiniyam, 1958, is the Vice Chancellor read with Chapter XIII, Rule 11 of the Ist Statutes of the University.
Sri Satyanshu Ojha learned counsel appareling on behalf of opposite parties upon instructions submits that the U.P. Government servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 are admittedly applicable upon employees of the university. It has also been submitted that inadvertently a copy of the inquiry report could not be furnished to the petitioner.
Upon consideration of submission raised by learned counsel for parties and perusal of record, particularly the impugned order, it is apparent that the same has been passed without consideration of material evidence, oral or documentary regarding proving of charges against petitioner. In fact a perusal of impugned order makes it apparent that the same is a completely non speaking one.
In view of the aforesaid facts, a writ in the nature of Certiorari is issued quashing the impugned order dated 22nd November, 2019 at the admission stage itself. A further writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued directing the concerned authority to provide a copy of the inquiry report to the petitioner within a period of 10 days from today. Upon receipt of the inquiry report, petitioner shall furnish a reply to the same within a period of 20 days thereafter. The final orders thereafter shall be passed by the competent authority in terms of Act and the Ist Statutes applicable upon petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of submission of reply by petitioner.
In terms of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 prabhat