Back
2016 Supreme(Cal) 301
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
Dipankar Datta, J.
Dr. Surajit Ch. Mukhopadhyay – Petitioner
Versus
The W.B.N.U.J.S & Ors. – Respondents
W.P. No. 25523 (W) OF 2014
Decided On : 11-07-2016
For the Petitioner: Mr. Kishore Datta, Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya, Ms. Tannistha Bandyopadhyay
For the Respondent: Mr. Pratik Dhar, Mr. Pappu Adhikary, Mr. Samir Halder, Mr. Debangshu Ghorai
THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF A UNIVERSITY DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INITIATE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE UNIVERSITY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE UNIVERSITY ACT OR STATUTES.
Headnote:
DIPANKAR DATTA V. WEST BENGAL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES - UNIVERSITY GRIEVANCE - THE WEST BENGAL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES ACT, 1999 - SECTION 17, 23, 25, 32, 33 - THE COURT HELD THAT THE VICE-CHANCELLOR LACKED THE JURISDICTION TO INITIATE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND QUASHED THE CHARGE-SHEET ISSUED TO HIM.
Fact of the Case:
THE PETITIONER, REGISTRAR OF WEST BENGAL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES, WAS ISSUED A CHARGE-SHEET BY THE VICE-CHANCELLOR FOR ALLEGED MISMANAGEMENT OF FUNDS AND NON-ADHERENCE TO FINANCIAL RULES. THE PETITIONER CHALLENGED THE JURISDICTION OF THE VICE-CHANCELLOR AND THE VALIDITY OF THE CHARGE-SHEET.
Finding of the Court:
THE COURT HELD THAT THE VICE-CHANCELLOR'S ACTION IN DRAWING UP THE CHARGE-SHEET WAS BEYOND HIS AUTHORITY AND THAT THE ENTIRE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS WERE VITIATED BY SUCH USURPATION OF JURISDICTION.
Issues: 1. WHETHER THE VICE-CHANCELLOR HAD THE JURISDICTION TO INITIATE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER? 2. WHETHER THE CHARGE-SHEET ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WAS VALID?
Ratio Decidendi: THE COURT RELIED ON THE PROVISIONS OF THE WEST BENGAL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES ACT, 1999, WHICH VESTS THE POWER TO INITIATE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE UNIVERSITY IN THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, NOT THE VICE-CHANCELLOR.
Final Decision: THE COURT QUASHED THE CHARGE-SHEET ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER AND GRANTED HIM LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE APPROPRIATE FORUM TO CHALLENGE THE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Dipankar Datta, J.
1. The petitioner is the Registrar of the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (hereafter the university).
2. A charge-sheet dated 27th August, 2014 was issued to him by the Vice-Chancellor of the university. The imputations primarily related to mismanagement of funds by the petitioner as well as non-adherence to the financial rules of the university, while holding office as its registrar. The petitioner was simultaneously placed under suspension by the vice-chancellor.
3. The petitioner in his response to the charge-sheet had questioned the jurisdiction of the vice-chancellor to draw up disciplinary proceedings against him apart from denying and disputing the material allegations leveled therein.
4. The vice-chancellor was not satisfied with the response of the petitioner and proceeded to appoint an inquiry officer.
5. It was at such stage that this writ petition was presented by the petitioner on 3rd September, 2014 seeking quashing of the charge-sheet as well as the order of suspension.
6. After hearing the parties on a couple of days, the first effective order on the writ petition was passed on 22nd September, 2014. The points taken by the petitioner while mounting a challenge to the action of the vice-chancellor in issuing the impugned charge-sheet to him were noticed. The first one was relating to the jurisdiction of the vice-chancellor, the second pertained to mala fide action and the third was that the charge-sheet had been issued with closed mind. While declining the prayer for stay of disciplinary proceedings, this Bench had the occasion to observe as follows :-
“The allegations leveled against the petitioner are indeed serious. What is equally serious is the petitioner’s allegation that the Vice Chancellor being a signatory to all the documents that the petitioner had signed, cannot escape the liability of facing disciplinary proceeding.
To my mind, these are matters which are not to be examined at this stage. However, the seriousness of the allegations cannot be simply ignored; on the contrary, the same merit identification of whoever is responsible for mismanagement of funds, be it the Vice Chancellor or the petitioner or any other person acting jointly or severally and appropriate action being taken to bring the offender to book. The University is an educational institution of repute with the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India as the Chancellor and any attempt to tarnish its image must be viewed with extreme concern.
It is in these exceptional facts and circumstances that a free, fair, proper and meaningful inquiry into the allegations leveled against the petitioner ought to be conducted. Without meaning any disrespect to the inquiry officer, who has already been appointed by the Vice Chancellor, I propose to interfere at this stage only on the limited aspect of nominating an inquiry officer to take the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the petitioner to its logical conclusion. With that in view, I appoint Hon’ble Justice Provendu Narayan Sinha (Retd.) as the inquiry officer to inquire into the charges leveled against the petitioner and to submit a report for consideration of the Executive Council of the University.”
……………………………………………………………….
The petitioner shall have time till October 13, 2014 to reply to the charges. The inquiry shall commenced from October 14, 2014 or soon thereafter, subject to convenience of Justice Sinha and tender of evidence, oral and documentary be completed by the parties preferably by January 15, 2015.
In the inquiry, the petitioner shall be entitled to reasonable, adequate and effective opportunity of raising defence including opportunity to adduce witnesses in defence. However, the prayer for legal assistance made by Mr. Datta is refused at this stage. It is made clear that if the University proposes to appoint a presenting officer who is a law graduate and/or a person who is having a legally trend mind to conduct the prosecution case, the petiti
