I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL THE HON’BLE CHI EF JUSTI CE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTI CE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (S/B) No.146 of 2026

18 March, 2026 Shivendra Kumar Kashyap -----Petitioner Versus Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology Patnagar and Others ----Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Vipul Sharma and Mr. Maneesh Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Satyendra Singh Lingwal, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2/ G.B. Pant University.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the charge- sheet dated 05.02.2026 and the consequential departmental disciplinary enquiry in pursuance thereof.

2. The petitioner is presently posted as Professor of Agricultural Communication and also the Co-ordinator, DST-TEC (Department of Science and Technology, Technology Enabling Centre).

3. It seems that various complaints were made against the petitioner and for enquiring into the allegations made against the petitioner, the Vice- Chancellor of the respondent-university issued an office order dated 05.06.2024 appointing enquiry committee constituting of Dr. B.S. Bisht (Retired) Vice Chancellor of G.B. Pant University as Enquiry Officer and Dr. Vivekanand then Additional Chief Personnel Officer as Presenting Officer.

4. Subsequently, by office order dated 11.07.2025, the enquiry committee was reconstituted and in place of Dr. Vivekanand, Shri K.S. Pundir, Chief Administrative Officer (Karmik Prabhand Anubhag) was appointed as Presenting Officer.

5. It further appears that on 05.02.2026, the Chief Personnel Officer acting on behalf of the Vice-Chancellor issued the impugned charge-sheet to the petitioner.

6. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per Rule 6 of the Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 which are applicable in the present case, the appointing authority is the disciplinary authority and further that as per Rule 7(2), the charge-sheet has to be issued and signed by disciplinary authority whereas in the instant case, the charge-sheet has been issued by Chief Personnel Officer acting on behalf of the Vice-Chancellor.

7. It is urged that the Vice-Chancellor is not the he could not have issued the chargeheet. The submission Board of Management of the University.

8. Shri Satendra Singh Lingwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-university does not dispute that the appointing authority of the petitioner is the Board of Management. He fairly concedes that in the present case, charge-sheet has been issued by a person who is not competent to issue the same. He states that the charge-sheet would be withdrawn and shall be issued by the competent authority.

9. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent-university, we dispose of the writ petition by providing that the impugned charge-sheet shall be withdrawn forthwith. This is without prejudice to the right of the person/authority competent to issue charge-sheet. In the event any fresh charge-sheet is issued to the petitioner, it shall be open to the petitioner to challenge the same in the manner permissible under law.

10. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)

(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)

Dated: 18.03.2026 SS SUKHBANT Digitally signed by SUKHBANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=71978f9c61bfde0ba69967c787b1764ea7bc7dd129a8a6 SINGH 380d49b1885e628615, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=2D8B71B8D8E345F6B7F95B1DD4FB4BEBD2B7D72 C42261361AED33172F152148D, cn=SUKHBANT SINGH Date: 2026.03.20 10:14:37 +05'30'