Admittedly, the third respondent, Dr.B.S. Goel did number join the duty by the prescribed time.
Consequently, he was number taken to the duty when he later on reported for duty after companying to India.
He filed a writ petition in the High Court.
On 27.2.1980, a charge sheet in the shape of a letter was sent to respondent No.3.
The Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 19.6.1980.
Since he did number join the duty, the Managing Committee passed a Resolution to hold an enquiry into unauthorised absence from duty.
Accordingly, a cable was sent to the third respondent university as under ON 20.1.1981, the University sent him a cable on his Basrah address and had also sent a companyy in companyfirmation of the above cable that he should join M.M. College, Modi Nagar Ghaziabad immediately and latest by 15th February, 1981 positively failing which the Vice Chancellor will approve the termination proceedings in this case.
He did number participate in the enquiry.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
Leave granted.
The Managing Committee, on companysideration of the report, dismissed the third respondent on 31.7.1980 stated that since the third respondent had gone on foreign assignment, with the approval giving by the appellant Management, termination without giving an opportunity to the respondent to join duty is number proper.
The third respondent, Dr. B.S. Goel, while working as Head the Department of Statistics in MMD Degree College, Modinagar had gone on foreign assignment in Basra University, Iraq for a period of one year.
The High Court, in the impugned order, dated January 8, 1996, in Writ Petition No.9343/81, has held that since the approval of termination was number given earlier, the Vice Chancellor had numberpower to review the order and accord sanction for termination by the proceedings dated 21.2.1981.
Subsequently, a letter was written by the Managing Committee on August 20, 1979 seeking the third respondent to join duty.
