9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt application being I.A. No. 5579/2014 was filed for amendment in the prayer which was allowed vide order dated 11.12.2014 and thereafter, amended writ petition was filed in which the petitioner added the prayer for quashing of the order as contained in Memo No. 1963/2014 dated 15.10.2014, by which the service of the petitioner has been terminated with immediate effect. 4. The case of the petitioner is that the Jharkhand Public Service Commission has issued an Advertisement for appointments on different posts including the Assistant Registrar vide Advertisement No. 2/2004. In the aforesaid Advertisement, all the five posts of Assistant Registrar was indicated under the Ranchi University but at Sl.No.1 of the Advertisement, necessary directions was stipulated that the post of Deputy Registrar, Assistant Registrar, Assistant Librarian can be changed (reduced or enhanced) and the persons appointed can be transferred/adjusted against any of the three Universities. 5. The petitioner, having all requisite qualification as prescribed in the Advertisement, applied for the post of Assistant Registrar and after facing the interview, the Jharkhand Public Service Commission has recommended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... however, vide impugned office order as contained in Memo No. 1963/14 dated 15.10.2014, the service of the petitioner has been terminated which the petitioner has challenged in instant writ application (Annexure-10). 11. The petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 15.10.2014 on the ground that the provision under section 57 (2) (C) of the University Act was complied considering the Advertisement as well as subsequent action of the Vinoba Bhave University by which the vacancy position of the Assistant Registrar was intimated to the Commission before appointments were made. 12. Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Advertisement which was published in the newspaper is known to all the three universities i.e. Ranchi University, Vinoba Bhave University and Sidhu Kanho Murmu University since there are other posts advertised in the same Advertisement for the other two Universities named above. Therefore, it is an admitted fact that all the three Universities knew that the Advertisement which was published for the post of Assistant Registrar for the Ranchi University but according to the necessary directives given in the Advertisement, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pointed on the post of Deputy Registrar in the Vinoba Bhave University which is evident from the letter having Reference No. 626/2013 dated 19.08.2013 written by the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University to the Principal Secretary of Hon'ble Governor (Annexure C/1 of the Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and 2) in which at paragraph-6, they have specifically stated that one Mr. Bijay Kumar Singh was charge-sheeted because of the reasons given therein but there is no statement relating to any charge-sheet against the petitioner. Therefore, the appointment of the petitioner has not even been attached by the CBI. 16. Learned counsel concluded his argument by submitting that even otherwise the Hon'ble Chancellor cannot review its own decision that too after a lapse of eight years, as the same which is against settled proposition of law. 17. Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, learned counsel for the Vinoba Bhave University reiterated its stand made in the counter affidavit and submits that the letter of the office of Hon'ble Chancellor dated 17.12.2005 has intimated the Vice Chancellor on the basis of information by JPSC that one writ petition has been filed by Raj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce Commission submits that it would be evident from perusal of Annexure-2 of the writ application that the petitioner was recommended for appointment by the J.P.S.C. on the post of Assistant Registrar. He further submits that it is well settled law that appointing authority has power to make appointment on the strength of the recommendation of Public Service Commission and the appointing authority has also power to differ with the recommendation of the Public Service Commission by assigning reasons and at the same time the appointing authority has also power to terminate the services of such appointee in the facts and circumstances of the case. 19. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials available on record, it is quite evident that the ground for termination of service of the petitioner is not in consonance with the law since the Provision under section 57(2) (C) of the University Act was complied along with considering the Advertisement as well as subsequent action of the Vinoba Bhave University by which the vacancy position of the Assistant Registrar was intimated to the Commission before appointments were made and taking into consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ept hanging indefinitely. This issue has been adjudicated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Government of India Vs. CITEDAL FINE PHARMACEUTICALS, Madras and Others as reported in (1989) 3 SCC 483 wherein at para 6 it has held as under; "6. ...... While it is true that Rule 12 does not prescribe any period within which recovery of any duty as contemplated by the rule is to be made, but that by itself does not render the rule unreasonable or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In the absence of any period of limitation it is settled that every authority is to exercise the power within a reasonable period. What would be reasonable period would depend upon the facts of each case" Further in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Bhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. as reported in (2007) 11 SCC 363 at para 18 the same principle has been laid down which is quoted as under; "18. It is trite that if no period of limitation has been prescribed, statutory authority must exercise its jurisdiction within a reasonable period. What, however, shall be the reasonable period would depend upon the nature of the statute, rights and liabilities thereunder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of the petitioner was further placed before the Syndicate in its meeting held on 15.04.2006 and the Syndicate University has approved the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Registrar which has been communicated vide order contained in Memo No. 2697/06 dated 02.05.2006 (Annexure-3). As such, in the background of these facts and circumstances of the case the order of review of own order by the Hon'ble Chancellor after a gap of more than 8 years is not in consonance with the law. 23. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order is fit to be quashed. Consequently, the impugned order as contained in Memo No. 1963/2014 dated 15.10.2014, whereby the service of the petitioner has been terminated with immediate effect is quashed and set aside. The Respondent authorities are directed to ensure that all consequential benefits pursuant to setting aside the impugned order be given to the petitioner within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 24. With the aforesaid directions the instant writ application is allowed and disposed of. The interlocutory application, if any, also stands disposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
