Rajasthan High Court
Dr. Om Prakash Mahala S/O S R Mahala vs University Of Rajasthan on 13 July, 2021
Bench: Sangeet Lodha, Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 371/2020
D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.5300/2020
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8141/2019
Dr. Om Prakash Mahala S/o SR Mahala, Associate Professor
Public Administration Department, University of Rajasthan, R/o
C-1 University Campus, Rajasthan University, J.L.N. Marg, Jaipur.
----Appellant/Petitioner
Versus
1. University of Rajasthan, through its Registrar, Jawahar Lal
Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
2. Prof. Rakesh Kumar Kothari, Vice Chancellor, University of
Rajasthan, JLN Marg, Jaipur.
3. Dr. Shalini Chaturvedi, Head of the Department Public
Administration, University of Rajasthan Campus, JLN
Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Shri Vimal Choudhary with
Shri Yogesh Tailor
For Respondent(s) : Shri R.N. Mathur, Sr. Advocate with
Shri Shovit Jhajharia) &
Shri Ajit Maloo)
through V.C.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment
Judgment Reserved on :: 06/07/2021
Judgment Pronounced on :: 13/07/2021
(PER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL):
(2 of 5) [SAW-371/2020]
This intra court appeal has been preferred by the successful
petitioner against the condition put by the learned Single Judge,
while allowing the writ petition vide its order dated 23.3.2020,
restricting his entitlement to continue on the post of Head of the
Public Administration Department (for brevity- `the HoD') in
University of Rajasthan (for short- `the UoR') till a permanent
Associate Professor joins.
The facts in brief are that the appellant, being Associate
Professor, was appointed as HoD by the respondent UoR vide
order dated 19.3.2015 for three years. The Headship of
Departments in UoR is governed by rotation as provided under the
guidelines approved by the Syndicate. On expiry of the term of
Headship of the petitioner on 18.3.2018, vide order dated
20.3.2018, Dr. Ashok Singh, the then Assistant Professor, was
appointed as HoD. In the writ petition no.6697/2018 preferred by
the appellant against the order dated 20.3.2018, this Court vide
its interim order dated 8.4.2019 stayed the order dated
20.3.2018. Thereafter, the UoR vide its order dated 22.4.2019
appointed Dr. Shalini Chaturvedi, the respondent no.3, a
Probationer Associate Professor as HoD. The writ petition
no.8141/2019 preferred by the appellant challenging the
appointment of the respondent no.3 has been allowed by the
order impugned herein; but, while holding the appellant entitled to
continue as HoD, his tenure has been made subject to joining of a
permanent Associate Professor in the Department.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid rider, learned counsel for the
appellant contended that tenure of HoD, as per the guidelines laid
down by the Syndicate, is three years which could not have been
curtailed by the learned Single Judge by imposing the aforesaid
(3 of 5) [SAW-371/2020]
condition. Referring the various orders, such as, Annexures-A1,
A/R-1, A/R-2, A/R-4 & A/R-5 dated 22.4.2020, 11.1.2010,
6.5.2020, 17.11.2017 and 18.11.2020 respectively, learned
counsel submitted that similarly situated other HoDs in various
faculties have been reappointed for three years. He, therefore,
prayed that the direction contained in the order dated 23.3.2020
be deleted and his appointment order dated 22.4.2020 be
modified suitably deleting the rider contained therein.
Learned counsel for the UoR submitted that the appointment
order dated 22.4.2020 came to be issued by it in pursuance of the
direction issued by the learned Single Judge, He, however, did not
dispute that orders of re-appointment of other HoDs in absence of
availability of suitable candidate for appointment by rotation, have
been issued for a period of three years.
Learned senior counsel for the respondent no.3 submitted
that the learned Single Judge has committed no error in restricting
right of the appellant to continue as HoD till the new eligible
Associate Professor joins. He further submitted that a writ
petition preferred by the respondent no.3 claiming her
confirmation as Associate Professor on completion of one year on
probation in terms of University Statute is subjudice before this
Court and in case the same is allowed, the appellant would not be
entitled to continue as HoD.
Disputing that the petitioner is entitled to continue for a
fresh term of three years on re-appointment, learned senior
counsel, however, could not dispute that had the order impugned
dated 23.3.2020 did not contain any rider limiting entitlement of
the appellant to continue as HoD, his order of appointment would
(4 of 5) [SAW-371/2020]
have been in similar terms as has been passed in cases of other
similarly situated HoDs.
Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the
record.
The condition imposed by learned Single Judge permitting
the appellant to continue on the post of HoD till a permanent
Associate Professor joins in the Department cannot be sustained
for the reason that indisputably, the tenure of a HoD cannot go
beyond three years as stipulated in the guidelines which can be
curtailed by the Vice Chancellor for the exigencies mentioned
therein. Hence, the blanket continuation of the appellant as HoD
which also infringes upon discretion of the Vice Chancellor to
shorten the tenure flies in the face of guidelines relating to
rotation of Headship. Therefore, the condition deserves to be
struck down.
The re-appointment orders available on record issued in
favour of other HoDs are for a period of three years. Learned
counsels for the respective parties did not dispute that the
appointment order dated 22.4.2020 issued in favour of the
appellant would have been in similar terms as issued in respect of
other HoDs but for the condition imposed by the learned Single
Judge in the order impugned dated 23.3.2020. In view thereof,
this appeal is allowed in the below mentioned terms:
1) the direction of the learned Single Judge to permit the
appellant to continue as Head of the Public Administration
Department till a permanent Teacher holding the post of
Associate Professor is made available and joins in the
Department, is quashed and set aside;
(5 of 5) [SAW-371/2020]
2) the University of Rajasthan shall amend the appointment
order dated 22.4.2020 in terms of re-appointment orders
issued in favour of other HoDs;
3) the aforesaid direction(s) shall not prejudice rights of the
respondent no.3 subject to decision of the pending writ
petition filed by her.
The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J (SANGEET LODHA),J
RAVI SHARMA /20
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
