Back
2021 Supreme(Ori) 326
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.
Dr. Bijayananda Naik - Appellant
Versus
Fakir Mohan University & Ors. - Respondents
W. P. (C) No. 5733 of 2009
Decided On : 17-02-2021
M/s. S. Patra-1, P.K. Mohapatra & A. Panda, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. S.R. Singhsamanta, R. Sharma, P.R. Patnaik & B. Binay, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an individual is entitled to financial benefits and continuity in service, despite being unjustly deprived of discharging their duties, based on the principles of natural justice and reasonableness.
Headnote:
Financial Claim - Service Continuity - [Environmental Science] - [Fakir Mohan University Act, Section 7(1)(a); University Statute, Section 12(3)] - The court found that the petitioner, a professor at Fakir Mohan University, was unjustly deprived of financial claims and continuity in service due to arbitrary actions by the university. The court relied on legal principles established in Union of India v. Madhusudan Prasad and Jute Corporation of India Limited v. Judhistira Swain to rule that the petitioner is entitled to financial benefits and continuity in service, despite being unjustly deprived of discharging his duties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a professor at Fakir Mohan University, was unjustly deprived of financial claims and continuity in service due to arbitrary actions by the university. The court found that the petitioner was exonerated from the allegations made against him and was entitled to financial benefits and continuity in service.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was unjustly deprived of financial claims and continuity in service due to arbitrary actions by the university. The court ruled that the petitioner is entitled to financial benefits and continuity in service, despite being unjustly deprived of discharging his duties.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to financial claims and continuity in service after being unjustly deprived of discharging his duties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal principles established in Union of India v. Madhusudan Prasad and Jute Corporation of India Limited v. Judhistira Swain to rule that the petitioner is entitled to financial benefits and continuity in service, despite being unjustly deprived of discharging his duties.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the university to calculate and pay the financial claim to the petitioner for the period from 20.08.2007 to 08.12.2008 with continuity of his service. The court also ruled that such benefits shall be extended to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of the judgment.
JUDGMENT
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J. - The petitioner, who was working as Professor and Head of Post Graduate Department of Environment Science, Fakir Mohan University, Balasore, has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 06.12.2008 in Annexure-9, so far as it relates to denial of financial claim for the period from 20.08.2007 to the date of his joining, i.e., 08.12.2008, and issue direction to the opposite parties to grant continuity in service and allow him arrear salary for the said period.
2. The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner, after completing his post graduation in the subject Zoology, did his Ph.D from Birla Institute of Technology Science at Pilani, and thereafter D.Sc. from Allahabad University. By following due procedure of selection, the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in Zoology and consequentially promoted to the post of Reader and continued as Head of the Department of Zoology in N.C. (Autonomous) College, Jajpur.
2.1 On 01.03.2005, an advertisement was issued by Fakir Mohan University for filling up of the post of Professor in Environmental Science. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner applied for and on being duly selected he was appointed as Professor in Environmental Science on 12.04.2005. Thereafter, he having relieved from the Government service on 09.05.2005, joined in the said post on 12.05.2005. The ViceChancellor of the University wrote letters to the petitioner as well as the Professors of other disciplines to send self appraisal forms for the purpose of confirmation in service. On 06.02.2007, the services of many Professors, Readers and Lecturers were conformed by the University, whereas the service of the petitioner was not confirmed. The reason for non-confirmation was that on 13.03.2007 the then ViceChancellor made serious allegations against the petitioner in the office file, which was not communicated to the petitioner. On the basis of such allegations, which were made behind the back of the petitioner, an enquiry committee was formed by the Syndicate.
2.2 On 17.03.2007, the enquiry committee, after formal discussion with the petitioner, but, however, without discussing or disclosing about the allegations so levelled against him, submitted report observing against the petitioner. On consideration of such report of the enquiry committee, the Syndicate resolved that continuance of the petitioner is detrimental to the interest of the department and accordingly resolved to request the Government not to extend the lien of the petitioner and revert him back with effect from 10.05.2007. Being aggrieved by such communication from the Registrar, Fakir Mohan University discontinuing the petitioner's service and reverting him back to the Government Service, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.4784 of 2007. While entertaining the writ petition, this Court passed an interim order not to take any coercive action against the petitioner pursuant to said communication. The said interim order was extended from time to time and as such, the petitioner continued in service in Fakir Mohan University as the Professor and Head of the Department of Environmental Sciences. After the appearance of the counsel for Fakir Mohan University and the State, counter affidavit was filed in the said writ petition, from which the petitioner could able to know that due to some allegation by the then Vice-Chancellor, his service was not made confirmed, though similarly situated persons, who were appointed along with him, were confirmed in the meantime. More so, a committee was constituted to conduct an enquiry and on the basis of the report submitted by the said committee steps were taken by the Syndicate to revert him back to the Government Service. After due adjudication, W.P.(C) No. 4784 of 2007 was disposed of on 08.05.2007 directing the University to take a decision afresh in accordance with the provisions contained in the statute.
2.3 Thereafter, on 18.08.2007, a note
