The Managing Committee, ... vs Arjun Choudhary
2022 Latest Caselaw 4825 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       Letters Patent Appeal No.823 of 2018
                                          In
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11909 of 2007
     ======================================================

Arjun Choudhary son of Late Saryug Choudhary Resident of Mohalla Saidnagar, Near Kali Asthan, P.O. and P.S. Laheria Sarai, District Darbhanga.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The Union Of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2. The Joint Secretary (Languages) Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

3. The Director (Languages) Education Development, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

4. The Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, through its Registrar, 56-67, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

5. The Vice Chancellor, Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56-67, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

6. The Registrar, Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56-67, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

7. The Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, through its Chairman, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga.

8. Chairman Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, through its Chairman, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga.

9. Dr. Sadanand Jha, Scholar Nominee of Union of India, Member, Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, through its Chairman, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga.

10. Deb Narayan Yadav, State of Bihar representative member, Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, Darbhanga

11. Ramanuj Sharma, founder Society (Annapurnas Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Kendriya Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori) representative member Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, through its Chairman, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga.

12. Principal, Raj Kumari Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kelhanta Patory.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

Letters Patent Appeal No. 1654 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11909 of 2007 ======================================================

1. The Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan Through Its Registrar 56-57, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

2. The Vice Chancellor, Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56-57, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

3. The Registrar, Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56-57, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. Arjun Choudhary Son of Late Saryug Choudhary Resident of Mohalla, Saidnagar, Near Kali Asthan, P.O. and P.S. Laheria Seraj, Dist- Darbhanga.

2. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

3. The Joint Secretary (Languages), Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

4. The Director (Languages) Education Department, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

5. The Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, through its Chairman, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, Dist- Darbhanga.

6. The Chairman, Managing Committee Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, Dist- Darbhanga.

7. Dr. Sadanand Jha, Scholar nominee of Union of India, Member, Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, Dist- Darbhanga.

8. Dev Narayan Yadav, State of Bihar representative member, Managing Committee Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, at and P.O. Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, Dist- Darbhanga.

9. Ramanuj Sharma, Founder Society (Annapurna Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Kendriya Sanskrit, Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori) representative member Managing Committee Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, at and P.O.- Kolhanta Patori, P.S. Moro, Dist- Darbhanga.

10. The Principal, Raj Kumari Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kelhanta Patory.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Letters Patent Appeal No. 1322 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11909 of 2007 ====================================================== Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

1. The Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth Kolhanta, Patory through its Chairman At and P.O.-Kolhanta, Patory, P.S. Moro, Dist. Darbhanga.

2. The Chairman, Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kolhanta, Patory At and P.O.-Kolhanta, Patory, P.S. Moro, Dist. Darbhanga.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. Arjun Choudhary Son of Late Saryug Choudhary, Resident of Mohalla-

Saidnagar, Near Kali Asthan, P.O. P.S.-Laheriasarai, District-Darbhanga.

2. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. The Joint Secretary (Languages), Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi.

4. The Director (Languages), Education Department, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi.

5. The Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, a Deemed University, established under the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, 56- 57, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

6. The Vice Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56-57, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

7. The Registrar, Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56-57, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi.

8. Dr. Sadanand Jha, Scholar Nominee of Union of India, Member-Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kolhanta, Patory, At and P.O. Kolhanta Patory, P.S. Moro, Dist. Darbhanga.

9. Dev Narayan Yadav, State of Bihar Representative Member, Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kolhanta, Patory, At and P.O. Kolhanta Patory, P.S. Moro, Dist. Darbhanga.

10. Ramanuj Sharma, Founder Society (Annapurna Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kolhanta, Patory) Representative member Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kolhanta, Patory, At and P.O. Kolhanta Patory, P.S. Moro, Dist. Darbhanga.

11. The Principal, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Kolhanta, Patory, At and P.O. Kolhanta Patory, P.S. Moro, Dist. Darbhanga.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 823 of 2018) For the Appellant/s : Mr.Amarendra Narayan, Advocate For the Union of India : Mrs.Kanak Verma, CGC (In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1654 of 2018) For the Appellant/s : Mr.S.D.Sanjay, Sr. Advocate Mrs.Priya Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Amarendra Narayan, Advocate (In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1322 of 2019) Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Hemant Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Advocate For the Union of India : Mrs.Kanak Verma, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)

Date : 06-12-2022 These three Letter Patent Appeal filed by the Arjun

Choudhary the then Prinicipal of Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma

Vidyapith, Kolhanta Patori, Darbhanga. The other two appeals is

by Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan Through Its Registrar and The

Managing Committee, Rajkumari Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit

Vidyapeeth. All the three appellants have assailed the order of the

learned Single Judge dated 03.04.2018 passed in CWJC No. 11909

of 2007.

2. Appellant-Arjun Choudhary has questioned to the

extent that there is no order of reinstatement, LPA No. 1654 of

2018 questioned the leaned Single Judge order to the extent asking

appellant to initiate further proceedings, whereas he is not the

proper and competent authority to proceed against Arjun

Choudhary. The appellant-The Managing Committee, Rajakumari

Ganesh Sharma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth through its Chairman in LPA

No. 1322 of 2019 contended that he is the competent authority to

take any further action against Arjun Choudhary and not appellant Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

No. 2-The Vice Chancellor, Rastriya Sankrit Sansthan in LPA

No.1654 of 2018 as directed by the learned Single Judge.

3. Prima facie, the learned Single Judge has committed

error in directing appellant No.2 in LPA No.1654 of 2018 (The

Vice Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan) whereas, there is no

master and servant relationship between Arjun Choudhary and

second appellant-Vice Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan.

On the other hand, master and servant relationship is between

Arjun Choudhary and appellant-The Registrar, Rastriya Sanskrit

Sansthan, to the above effect letters to appeal have been filed by

management.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant Arjun Choudhary

submitted that he is entitled for reinstatement. On the other hand,

during pendency of the litigation one Arbind Sharma is stated to

have been appointed as Principal on 17.12.2007, in the result the

appellant cannot be accommodated against the Principal post. In

the light of the appointment order issued in favour of Arbind

Sharma who has been arrayed as necessary proper party during

pendency of the CWJC No.11909 of 2007. However, perusal of the

cause title and record the appellant Arjun Choudhary-petitioner has

failed to amend the cause title in incorporating name of Arbind

Sharma as repondent No.13 (newly added respondent). Even, the Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

registry of this Court has not taken note of in respect of allowing

the petitioner-Arjun Choudhary application to implead Arbind

Sharma.

5. In view of these facts and circumstances learned

Single Judge has committed error in not ordering reinstatement of

Ajun Choudhary and also not decided what is the status of Arbind

Sharma who has been appointed on 17.12.2007 in place of

appellant-Arjun Choudhary.

6. Apex Court in the case of MD. ECIL vs. B.

Karunakaran reported in (1993) 4 SCC 727 and Chairman-

cum-Managing Coal India Ltd. vs. Ananta Saha & Ors.

reported in (2011) 5 SCC 142, Para 46 to 50 held as under:-

"46. In the last, the delinquent has submitted that this Court must issue directions for his reinstatement and payment of arrears of salary till date. Shri Bandopadhyay, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, has vehemently opposed the relief sought by the delinquent contending that the delinquent has to be deprived of the back wages on the principle of "no work--no pay". The delinquent had been practising privately i.e. has been gainfully employed, thus, not entitled for back wages.

Even if this Court comes to the conclusion that the High Court was justified in setting aside the order of punishment and a fresh enquiry is to be held now, the delinquent can simply be reinstated and put under suspension and would be entitled to subsistence allowance as per the service rules applicable in his case. The question of back wages shall be determined by the disciplinary Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

authority in accordance with law only on the conclusion of the fresh enquiry.

47. It is a settled legal proposition that the result of the fresh enquiry in such a case relates back to the date of termination. The submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants that the result of the enquiry in such a fact situation relates back to the date of imposition of punishment, earlier stands fortified by a large number of judgments of this Court and particularly in R. Thiruvirkolam v. Presiding Officer, Punjab Dairy Development Corpn. Ltd. v. Kala Singh and Graphite India Ltd. v.

Durgapur Projects Ltd.

48. In ECIL v. B. Karunakar, this Court held that where the punishment awarded by the disciplinary authority is quashed by the court/tribunal on some technical ground, the authority must be given an opportunity to conduct the enquiry afresh from the stage where it stood before the alleged vulnerability surfaced. However, for the purpose of holding fresh enquiry, the delinquent is to be reinstated and may be put under suspension. The question of back wages, etc. is determined by the disciplinary authority in accordance with law after the fresh enquiry is concluded.

49. The issue of entitlement of back wages has been considered by this Court time and again and consistently held that even after punishment imposed upon the employee is quashed by the court or tribunal, the payment of back wages still remains discretionary. Power to grant back wages is to be exercised by the court/tribunal keeping in view the facts in their entirety as no straitjacket formula can be evolved, nor a rule of universal application can be laid for such cases. Even if the delinquent is reinstated, it would not automatically make him entitled to back wages as entitlement to get back wages is independent of reinstatement. The factual scenario and the principles of justice, equity and good conscience have to be kept in view by an appropriate authority/court or Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

tribunal. In such matters, the approach of the court or the tribunal should not be rigid or mechanical but flexible and realistic. (Vide U.P. SRTC v. Mitthu Singh , Akola Taluka Education Society v. Shivaji and Balasaheb Desai Sahakari S.K. Ltd. v. Kashinath Ganapati Kambale.

50. In view of the above, the relief sought by the delinquent that the appellants be directed to pay the arrears of back wages from the date of first termination order till date, cannot be entertained and is hereby rejected. In case the appellants choose to hold a fresh enquiry, they are bound to reinstate the delinquent and, in case, he is put under suspension, he shall be entitled to subsistence allowance till the conclusion of the enquiry. All other entitlements would be determined by the disciplinary authority as explained hereinabove after the conclusion of the enquiry. With these observations, the appeal stands disposed of. No costs."

7. Further, Apex Court in the latest decision in the case

of State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. vs. Prabhat Kumar reported

in 2022 Live Law SC 736 reiterated the principle laid down by the

Apex Court. The principle laid down in the aforesaid judicial

pronouncement are that if dismissal order of an employee is set

aside on technicality in that event, matter would be remanded to

the disciplinary authority to commence the inquiry from the

defective stage and thereafter, regulate the intervening period from

the dismissal till pass of a fresh order. Further, the principle laid

down in the aforesaid decisions are that insofar as reinstatement of

dismissed employee in the event of quashing of dismissal order, Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

discretion is vested with the disciplinary authority either to place

an employees/officer under suspension or reinstatement. In view of

the aforesaid judicial pronouncement the disciplinary authority is

hereby directed to commence the inquiry from the defective stage

and complete within a period of four months from the date of

receipt of this order. Insofar as reinstatement/suspension is

concerned the disciplinary authority is hereby directed to take a

decision either to reinstate appellant-Arjun Choudhary or place

him under suspension till passing of a fresh order. Thereafter,

regulate the intervening period from the date of initial dismissal till

passing of a fresh order as a duty or otherwise, in accordance with

law.

8. Learned Single Judge has committed error insofar as

reminding matter to second LPA-The Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan

Through its Registry which is not the competent authority in

respect of placing any action against the appellant-Arjun

Choudhary. Therefore, the competent authority/disciplinary

authority/appointing authority is hereby directed to take further

action and commence inquiry from the defective stage and

complete the same as stated above. To the above extent order of

the learned Single Judge stands modified.

9. Accordingly, these three LPAs allowed in part.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.823 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

10. Respective parties are hereby directed to cooperate

in implementation of the aforesaid order. If inquiry is not

completed before 01.07.2023 in that event, the appellant-Arjun

Choudhary is entitled to 50% of the retiral benefits and the same

shall be released on or before 15.07.2023.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J)

( Purnendu Singh, J) abhishekkr/-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date        14.12.2022
Transmission Date