P.C. with P.S. Kotwali Gangnahar, Roorkee.
Respondent No.1 was directed to appear before the Enquiry Committee, failing which an ex parte decision will be taken against him.
The order of suspension was also assailed by Respondent No.1 in the Writ Petition.
The High Court allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the order of termination and directed reinstatement of Respondent No.1 and the Management of the College was directed to pay the salary for the period during which he was placed under suspension.
Respondent No.1 was also given an opportunity to produce witnesses in his defense.
Charge No.03 Para No.7 of Complaint Letter Dated 04.09.2012 Due to this companytinuous insult and mental harassment, I, who is a senior most teacher who has 38 years of teaching experience, and who has been looking after performing the administrative duties and responsibilities of a Vice President while you go on leave, request you to kindly protect my dignity and seniority.
After receiving the report of the Investigating Officer of the P.S. Gangnahar Kotwali, Roorkee, the learned Judge i.e. Additional Civil Judge S.D.J.M. Roorkee finding the allegations as leveled by you in your application filed before the learned judge, Additional Civil Judge S.D. JH.M. Roorkee, has rejected your application vide order dated 26.05.2014.
You have acted insubordinately and made false companyplaints against the Chairman Secretary of the Managing Committee and also against the Principal, have written following letters directly to the Director, Higher Education, Uttarakhand, Haldwani First Letter dated 04.01.2014 Second Letter dated 31.01.2014 Third Letter dated 06.02.2014 Fourth Letter dated 28.02.2014 Fifth Letter dated 01.03.2014 Sixth Letter dated 12.04.2014 The aforesaid letters having been sent by you directly without any proper channel and the same is in clear violation of the Point No.05 of the Agreement having been given in Appendix Gha of the Garhwal University Srinagar Regulation.
The Honble Judge has clearly mentioned written in its judgment and order dated 26.05.2014 that the report is received from the companycerned Police Station.
Jayanti Adjariya alongwith his son has left his house and for which cases are going on between them in the Courts at Roorkee, Jhansi, Nainital and Allahabad.
The case in which you are an accused, against the same sections and with regard to the same charges, you have been given an application on 13.5.2014 before the Court of Additional Civil Judge/ D. J.M. Roorkee for filing a false case against Shri Manohar Lal Sharma, Chairman, Managing Committee, Dr. Vipin Pratap Gautam, Principal.
The Investigation Officer in the aforesaid criminal case, after recording the statements of the Principal Dr. Vipin Pratap Gautam, Member of the Purchasing Committee Dr. Surjeet Singh, Dr. Vijay Kumar, Shri Vijendra Singh, Shri Sandeep Poswal, Shri Amit Sharma, Assistant Accountant and after recording your statements also and obtaining signatures of all, has filed charge sheet in the Court on 31.10.2013 which is pending companysideration before the said Honble Court.
Dr. I.D. Kansal and Mr. K.S. Sharma, Members of the Managing Committee were requested to companyduct an enquiry.
The High Court was companyvinced that Respondent No.1 did number get sufficient opportunity to defend himself in the departmental enquiry.
The Fact Finding Committee submitted its report on 14.02.2014 holding Respondent No.1 guilty of all the three charges.
The services of Respondent No.1 were terminated by an order dated 13.07.2014.
CHARGE NO.02 You after hearing of the Appeal bearing No.
Commenting on the merits of the allegations against Respondent No.1, the High Court was of the opinion that sufficient evidence was number available to hold Respondent No.1 guilty of the charges.
In spite of the opportunity given to Respondent No.1 to defend himself, he did number appear before the Enquiry Committee.
On 12.10.2013, the P.S. Kotwali Gangnahar, Roorkee has registered a case against you bearing Crime Case No.269/ 13 at Serial No.276/13 under the aforesaid Sections.
At the very same, in your presence, Dr. Samrat Sharma, Assistant Professor, Hindi Department has leveled allegations against me with regard to the time table and he has used very filthy words to me in a very aggressive manner and thus he has behaved me like that without any reason.
You in order to save from the charges leveled against you with regard to forgery after having companyspired, the details of the letters which you have written against the Principal, Chairman Managing Committee and the Secretary of the Managing Committee and against me directly to the Police Administration as also to the Government of Uttarakhand, is given below Charge No.3 As per directions of the Honble Commissioner of Information Shri Vinod Nautiyal, after getting registered an FIR against you before the P.S. Kotwali Gangnahar Roorkee dated 12.10.2013 against you and on the basis of the said FIR, the police registered a Crime Case No.296/13 and after companyducting investigation in respect of the said case, charge sheet has been filed before Court on 31.10.2013.
A careful examination of the material on record would disclose that Respondent No.1 was number given sufficient opportunity to defend himself.
Respondent No.5 Dr. Smt.
Respondent No.1 did number appear before the Enquiry Committee on 12.07.2014.
The Enquiry Committee found that the charges levelled against Respondent No.1 were proved.
Respondent No.1 was an Assistant Professor Hindi in the Department of Hindi in the said College.
The following charges were framed and companymunicated to Respondent No.1 CHARGE NO.1 You are posted in this Non Governmental College on the post of Associate Professor and this College is affiliated to the H.N.B. Garhwal University, Srinagar.
Respondent No.1 was informed that he should submit his written statement by 14.02.2014.
According to the report received from the companycerned Police Station, in respect of the aforesaid case, Crime Case No.296/2013 under Sections 467/468/469/471 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered in respect of the aforesaid case in which the applicant Samrat Sharma is an accused and the respondents in the aforesaid case are the companyplainant of the case, in which Charge Sheet No.180/2013 dated 31.10.2013 has been sent.
The Appellant is a private aided companylege, affiliated to Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal Central University, Srinagar, Pauri Garhwal for short the HNBG University .
The High Court directed the reinstatement of Respondent No.1 with all companysequential benefits.
The approval of the Vice Chancellor, HNBGC University, Srinagar was sought by the BSM PG College, Roorkee Haridwar Appellant herein, which was granted on 16.09.2014.
The statement of Respondent No.5 and other witnesses were recorded by the Enquiry Committee.
The Inquiry Committee, after perusing the entire companyrespondences, has found you guilty for sending letters directly and without any proper channel to the Director, Higher Education, Uttarakhand.
There is a clear example that his wife Smt.
Kamlesh Sharma made a companyplaint to the Principal of the College on 04.09.2012 alleging misbehavior by Respondent No.1 on 01.09.2012 during the meeting of the teaching staff of the College.
You have written letter to the Director of Education, Higher Education, Haldwani intentionally, in clear disobedience and in violation of the Degree Arth/8 21 /1671/2011 12 dated 05.05.2011 which companytained your signature also and of which there are adequate proof against you.
Thereafter, a supplementary charge sheet was issued on 02.07.2014.
An explanation was sought from Respondent No.1 which was submitted on 12.10.2012.
/12074 119 3 /2013 filed before the Honble Information Commission, Uttarakhand, Dehradun, the Honble Commissioner of the Information Commission Shri Vinod Nautiyal in his disposal order dated 16.09.2013 has found you to be guilty for forging in the bills towards the educational equipments having been purchased from the grant amount received from the U.G.C. and has directed the Public Information Officer/ Principal to register a First Information Report against you in the nearest Police Station.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. Leave granted.
The judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand allowing the Writ Petition filed by Respondent No.1 Dr. Samrat Sharma and setting aside the order of termination of the services of Respondent No.1 is in challenge in this Appeal.
The said time table had been prepared according to his companysent.
The Enquiry Committee came to a companyclusion that Respondent No.1 used indecent language and behaved in an aggressive manner in the staff meeting on 01.09.2012.
Not being satisfied with the explanation given by Respondent No.1, the Managing Committee of the College decided to companystitute a companymittee to enquire into the charges levelled by Respondent No.5 in her letter dated 04.09.2012.
The Enquiry Committee also recommended criminal prosecution to be launched against Respondent No.1.
The Public Information Officer Principal in companypliance of the directions of the Honble Information Commissioner, has got registered a First Information Report against you with the Kotwali P.S. Gangnahar Roorkee on 12.10.2013 for the offence under Sections 467, 468, 469 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Committee recommended the termination of the services of Respondent No.1 as he was found guilty of Sub Section 17.04 of Section 49 j of the First Statute of the University of Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna, Garhwal, 1978 for short the First Statutes .
On the basis of the recommendations of the Enquiry Committee, three charges were framed against Respondent No.1 which are as follows CHARGE NO.01 PARA 04 OF COMPLAINT LETTER DATED 04.09.2012 On 01.09.2012 at 10.00 Oclock in the morning, the Principal had called a meeting of his entire teaching staff in the Principal room.
As Respondent No.1 was found guilty of the charges levelled against him, the Enquiry Committee recommended initiation of action against Respondent No.1.
Responding to the supplementary charge sheet dated 02.07.2014, Respondent No.1 submitted his explanation on 04.07.2014.
Respondent No.1 filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Uttarakhand challenging the order of termination of his services dated 13.07.2014 and the approval granted by the Vice Chancellor on 16.09.2014.
In any event, the High Court held that the imposition of penalty of termination of service was number companymensurate with the allegations made against Respondent No.1.
The Members of the Purchasing Committee namely Dr. Surjeet Singh, Dr. Vijay Kumar, Shri Vijendra Singh, Shri Sandeep Poswal, Shri Amit Sharma Assistant Accountant for making them an accused for the purpose of registering an FIR under section 156 3 of the Cr.
During the pendency of the departmental enquiry, Respondent No.1 was placed under suspension on 31.01.2014.
The Enquiry Committee recommended stern action against Respondent No.1 for indulging in the acts of insubordination, indiscipline and violation of the First Statutes and the provisions of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 for short Universities Act .
He was also informed that he can cross examine the witnesses during the fact finding enquiry by a companymittee companysisting of Dr. Dushyant Kumar, Vice President of the Managing Committee and Mr. Vikash Sharma, Advocate.
