SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.
Delhi Technological University - Appellant
Versus
B.S. Rawat - Respondent
LPA 68 of 2022 & CM Appl. 4877 of 2022 & CM Appl. 4879 of 2022
Decided On : 08-08-2022




Acceptance of resignation must comply with statutory authority; lack of power invalidates acceptance and allows for withdrawal.

Headnote:(A) Delhi Technological University (Amendment) Act, 2012 - Section 53 - Validity of resignation acceptance - Acceptance of resignation by an authority without requisite powers deemed invalid - The Appellant University faced issues due to vacancy of the Vice-Chancellor and actions deemed not in compliance with statute provisions - The Respondent's resignation tendered and subsequent withdrawal thereof before acceptance were central to the judgment. (Paras 1, 11, 20, 24)

(B) Reinstatement - Court held the resignation's acceptance was not valid, and reinstatement must be granted without back-wages for the duration the employee was employed elsewhere. (Paras 26, 27)

Facts of the case:
The Respondent's resignation was accepted by a Vice-Chancellor in an additional charge and was, therefore, argued to be illegal. The court found that the Respondent had validly withdrawn the resignation before acceptance.

Findings of Court:
The original judgment directed reinstatement with back-wages, later denied on the basis of the Respondent's concurrent engagement.

Issues: 1) Authority of the person accepting resignation; 2) Validity of reinstatement orders by a court.

Ratio Decidendi: The acceptance of resignation must follow statutory guidelines, and authority without power to accept invalidates the act. The decision reaffirms the legality of withdrawal of resignation before acceptance by competent authority.

Result: Appeal disposed of, reinstatement granted but back-wages denied.

Table of Content
1. overview of the appeal and directions of the lower court. (Para 1)
2. factual context of respondent's employment and resignation. (Para 2)
3. appellant argues legal authority for acceptance of resignation. (Para 3 , 4)
4. discussion of delay and its implications on the writ petition. (Para 5 , 6)
5. issues before the court regarding authority and reinstatement. (Para 10 , 11)
6. legal provisions surrounding appointment and authority of vice-chancellor. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
7. court's legal reasoning against appellant’s argument regarding the chancellor's powers. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
8. legitimacy of resignation acceptance and withdrawal under law. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
9. rulings on delay and laches; equity principles applied. (Para 23 , 24)
10. conclusion on reinstatement and back-wages. (Para 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT

1. The instant appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated 15.12.2021, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) 2611/2019, whereby the following directions had been given by the learned Single Judge:

    "51. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Order dated 25.05.2016,whereby the resignation tendered by the Petitioner was accepted as well as order dated 31.05.2016, whereby Petitioner was relieved and order dated 03.11.2016, whereby the request of the Petitioner for withdrawal of resignation was rejected, are quashed and set aside. Respondent is directed to reinstate the Petitioner into service within a period of four weeks from today. Petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits including continuity of service. Petitioner shall also be entitled to fullback-wages along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date he was relieved from the services of the Respondent till the date of reinstatement, except for the period he was gainfully employed"

2. The facts, in brief, leading to the instant appeal are as under:

a) It is stated that the Appellant-University invited applications for the post of Assistant Registrar (Legal) under the Unreserved category. On 10.08.2010, interviews were conducted for five posts of Assistant Registrar, and on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee, the Vice-Chancellor of the Appellant-University offered the post of an Assistant Registrar to the Respondent herein. Accordingly, on 23.08.2010, the Respondent joined the Appellant-University as Assistant Registrar (Legal).

b) Vide Delhi Technological University (Amendment) Act, 2012, Section 22 of the Delhi Technological University Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the "DTU Act") was amended, and Section 53 was added to the DTU Act. By way of newly amended Section 22, the Board of Management (hereinafter referred to as the "BOM") was to consist of the following persons:

    "The Board of Management shall consist of the following persons:

    (a) Chairperson shall be eminent educationist or an eminent scientist or eminent engineer/technologist or eminent industrialist to be nominated by the Chancellor.

    (b) The Vice Chancellor of the University

    (c) Three eminent persons in the disciplines of science, engineering, technology and management, nominated by the Government

    (d) Two Professors of the University nominated by the Government.

    (e) Two Deans of the University nominated by the Government

    (f) A representative of an Industry Association, nominated by the Government

    (g) Principal Secretary or Secretary (Finance) to the Government ex-officio;

    (h) Principal Secretary or Secretary (Higher Education) to the Government ex-officio;

    (i) Principal Secretary or Secretary (Technical Education) to the Government ex-officio;

    (j) Such other member or members as may be prescribed by the Statutes"

    Section 53 was also added which stated that the Chancellor could either suo moto or on the recommendation of the BOM issue such directions as may be necessary or expedient in the interest of administration, financial or academic functioning of the University and, in particular, to ensure peace and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top