WPSB/119/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 751 UK

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                AT NAINITAL
                         SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.

                                        AND

                             SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE, J.

WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 119 OF 2022

14TH MARCH, 2022

BETWEEN:

Shrawan Kumar Sharma .....Petitioner. And

Union of India & others ....Respondents.

Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. S.M. Srivastava, learned counsel.

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, learned Standing Counsel.

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned counsel.

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 to 5 : Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following

JUDGMENT :(per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)

In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged

the order of compulsory retirement passed against him by the

Gurukul Kangri (Deemed to be University), Haridwar.

However, it is brought to our notice, at the outset, that the

Rules provide an appeal against the order passed by the Vice

Chancellor of the University to the Board of Management.

2. In fact, the petitioner has filed a representation to

the Board of Management, and the representation is

addressed to the Vice Chancellor/Chairperson of the Board of

Management. However, the same has been rejected by the

Vice Chancellor stating that the appeal lies to the Board of

Management. It is not disputed, at this stage, that the Vice

Chancellor is the Chairperson of the Board of Management,

and therefore, he should act as a Chairperson of the Board of

Management, and not as a Vice Chancellor.

3. In that view of the matter, we dispose of the writ

petition directing that the Board of Management of the

Gurukul Kangri (Deemed to be University), Haridwar shall

consider Annexure No.22, the representation of the

petitioner, as an appeal to the Board of Management, after

affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner,

and to the authorities, pass a reasoned and speaking order

within a period of 45 days from the date of production of a

certified copy of this order, along with a copy of the brief.

4. While the matter is being taken up by the Board of

Management, the Vice Chancellor, who has passed the order

impugned, shall recuse himself from deciding the appeal.

5. With these observations, the writ petition is

disposed of.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to

produce a certified copy of this order along with a copy of

brief before the Registrar of the Gurukul Kangri (Deemed to

be University), Haridwar, within a period of ten days.

7. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued to the

parties on proper application.

(S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.)

(R.C. KHULBE, J.) Dated: 14TH March, 2022 NISHANT