AFR

CAV Order

1. By this writ petitioner, petitioner has questioned the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 26.08.2013 (Annexure P-1) whereby the petitioner who was on probation, his services were terminated and was discharged from service.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed on the post of Associate Professor (Bio-technology) vide order dated 15.02.2012 and has joined the appointed post on 05.03.2012. Service of petitioner is governed with provision of Central Universities Act, 2009 (in short “Act of 2009”) and Statue No.22 (1). Petitioner while discharging his duties has been given important responsibility as he was recommended as Research Supervisor in Biotechnology vide order dated 29.08.2012. It is contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that while petitioner was discharging his duties with utmost sincerity and hard work he was served with notice for clarifying the reason for not displaying model answers. Petitioner was initially appointed on probation and thereafter decision was taken to extend the period of probation of petitioner for one year vide resolution of the Executive Council meeting held on 19.04.2013. In the resolution as mentioned above probation period of six Teachers were extended mentioning that they hae not followed the instructions. However, it is the petitioner only who has been terminated from service before completion of extended probation period. He also pointed out that order of termination of petitioner and discharge from service during probation period is not a termination simpliciter but it is punitive in nature as the reasons for terminating services of petitioner (Probationer) was assessing his misconduct which is apparent from show cause notice issued to petitioner during his period of service one of which is dated 08.05.2013 issued by Head fo Department of Bio-Technology to explain the reason of preponement of Pre- Ph.D. course work class, not being present in the meeting held at 10:05 a.m. on 08.05.2013 and leaving campus without seeking the permission from examination unit. Another show cause notice was issued on 24.05.2013 to explain the reason for sending SMS to the mobile phone of the then Vice Chancellor. Registrar (Acg.) issued another show cause notice to petitioner dated 29.05.2013 for explaining the reason for not attending the Vice Chancellor while he was standing on the road in front of Forestry Department. Petitioner had submitted reply to show cause notices. Petitioner thereafter availed summer leave from 02.06.2013 to 23.06.2013. However due to his illness on account of mental harassment by the officials of the University, petitioner took medical treatment of anxiety related symptoms. Petitioner thereafter had joined duties on 05.08.2013 along with medical fitness certificate and suddenly petitioner was served with termination order dated 26.08.2013 by the Registrar (Acg.) mentioning unsatisfactory performance during probation period.

3. He contended that once probation period was extended for one year, performance of petitioner could have been assessed only upon completion of the period of probation and therefore termination of service of petitioner on the basis of assessment and evaluation of the performance of petitioner during that period, is highly arbitrary and illegal. He contended that the petitioner who is working as Associate Professor (Academic Staff) can be terminated only after following due process of law and following procedure as prescribed in Statute No.25 made under Act of 2009 which provides for a departmental enquiry to be conducted before issuing order of termination . No opportunity of hearing was afforded to petitioner. Behind the back of petitioner, misconduct of petitioner was discussed and pursuant to decision taken therein, impugned order has been passed. He contended that with respect to other similarly placed Professors namely Dr. Monika Bhadauria, Dr. Satendra Kumar Nirala, D