The court established that a university servant's suspension must be based on sufficient prima facie evidence of misconduct, as outlined in the Bihar State Universities Act, and that the right to protest against administrative decisions is protected under democratic principles.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Kumar, J.

Heard the parties.

2. Challenge in the present writ petition is made to the order as contained in letter dated 08.02.2025, issued by the Registrar of Maulana Mazharul Haque Arabic & Persian University (in short ‘the University’) by which the petitioner has been placed under suspension; by making a declaration that the impugned order of suspension is completely untenable in the eyes of law, the same being in blatant disregard to the provisions of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 and the provisions contained under the Service Statute (in short ‘the Statute’), as approved by the Chancellor on 20.09.1980; with a further direction to the concerned respondent authorities under the University to reinstate the petitioner along with all consequential benefits after revoking his suspension in the capacity of Head of Department of English of the University.

3. The petitioner having faced due process of recruitment/selection conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission (in short ‘Commission’) in pursuant to Advertisement No. 45/2024 was appointed against the post of Assistant Professor in English in the services of the University, under notification dated 03.05.2017. following the appointment, the petitioner submitted his joining in the University on 03.05.2017. Subsequently on the basis of the recommendation made by the Post Creation Absorption and Confirmation Committee of the University and after getting due approval by the Syndicate of the University, the services of the petitioner along with one another person were duly confirmed under notification dated 28.01.2021. The petitioner was further granted promotion as Assistant Professor (Senior Scale/Academic Level-11) with effect from 03.05.2021 in terms with the provisions contained under the Statutes regarding Career Advancement Scheme vide notification dated 16.03.2024.

4. Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner narrating the aforesaid facts further contended that the petitioner had been discharging his duty to the utmost satisfaction of the authorities concerned, which facts also fortified for the simple reason that taking note of the efficiency and sincerity of the petitioner, from time to time, he had been assigned several responsibilities in addition to the duties discharged by him in the capacity of Assistant Professor in English. In the meantime, a protest was made by the number of teachers as well as non-teaching employees against a decision taken by the authorities of the University with respect to renting out two floors of the main building of the academic block situated at Patna. The petitioner had also signed on the protest representation, which led to issuance of Office Order dated 18.12.2024, issued by the authorities of the University stating therein that the participation of the petitioner in the said protest was in violation of the Basic Good Conduct, Rules and Regulations of the Syndicate, hence the petitioner was removed from the membership of the Syndicate of the University by the aforenoted office order, the copy of the said order is marked as Annexure-P/7. The petitioner submitted his representation against the order aforenoted stating in detail, the ground for his participation in the aforesaid matter, which in no manner showed any act of misbehaviour. The explanation of the petitioner did not satisfy the aut