WPSB/558/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 3050 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL
           HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                              AND
                 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE

                        21ST SEPTEMBER, 2022
          WRIT PETITION (S/B) No. 558 OF 2022

Between:

Dr. Mritunjay Kumar.
                                                                 ...Petitioner
and

State of Uttarakhand and others.
                                                            ...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner. : Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, the learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 : Mr. S.S. Chauhan, the learned Deputy and 3. Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.

Counsel for the respondent no. 2. : Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, the learned counsel.

ORDER : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)

The petitioner has preferred the present Writ

Petition, firstly, to assail the order dated 24.01.2022

passed by the State of Uttarakhand, whereby, upon

revocation of the petitioner's suspension and his

reinstatement with pay as the Registrar, Uttarakhand

Ayurved University, Harrawala, Dehradun, for the purpose

of ending the ongoing administrative impasse in the

Uttarakhand Ayurved University and to run the

government works smoothly, and keeping in view the

interest of the employees, the petitioner is attached to the office of the Secretary, AYUSH and AYUSH Education till

further orders. The said order further states that, during

the petitioner's period of attachment, as aforesaid,

Professor - Dr. Arun Kumar Tripathi, Campus Director,

Gurukul Campus Haridwar, will discharge the functions and

responsibilities of the Registrar, Uttarakhand Ayurved

University, along with his present duties as the Registrar

In-Charge. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the

respondent nos. 2 and 3 to release his due salary for the

post of Registrar of the aforesaid University.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is serving as

the regular Registrar of the respondent no. 2-University.

The petitioner has himself disclosed that he was earlier

suspended on 27.10.2018, and attached to the Office of

the Secretary, AYUSH and AYUSH Education. He was

arrested in Case FIR No. 09 of 2018, registered at P.S.

Vigilance Sector, Dehradun under Sections 120B, 420,

467, 468 & 471 IPC, and Section 13(1)A/C/D read with

Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, on

03.12.2018. He remained incarcerated till 16.08.2021,

when he was granted bail by the Supreme Court on certain

conditions.

3. The case of the petitioner is that his suspension

was revoked on 28.12.2021, and he was again posted as

the Registrar of the respondent-University. However, by

the impugned order, he has been attached to the Office of

the Secretary, AYUSH and AYUSH Education.

4. The submission of the learned counsel for the

petitioner is that, since the petitioner is the regularly

appointed Registrar of the respondent-University, and his

suspension has been revoked, he is entitled to hold the

Office of the Registrar of the respondent-University, and

discharge his duties in that capacity. Learned counsel

submits that the respondents could not have attached the

petitioner, as has been done by the impugned order. He

further submits that the reason for the said attachment is

stated to be the ongoing administrative impasse in the

respondent-University, and to run the government works

smoothly, while keeping in view the interest of the

employees. He submits that the attachment has not been

made on account of the pendency of the criminal case

against him, as aforesaid.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also

placed reliance on the order passed by this Court on

23.10.2018 in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 338 of 2018. By this

order, the earlier attachment of the petitioner, made on

20.04.2018, was set aside by the Court. The relevant

extract from the said order reads as follows :-

"Learned counsel for the State was put a query that under what provision of law, the petitioner, who was appointed as Registrar, was attached in the Office of Ayurveda and Ayurvedic Education Department. However, no valid explanation could be given for the same.

Petitioner is the employee of the Uttarakhand Ayurveda University. No provision has been brought to the notice of the Court, whereby a person working as Registrar could be attached in the office of the State Government.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Order dated 20.4.2018 (Annexure No.14) is quashed and set aside. The petitioner shall be entitled for all the consequential benefits."

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also

argued that the impugned order has to be tested on the

basis of the reasons disclosed therein, and the other

aspect, namely, the pendency of the criminal case

involving the petitioner in relation to his conduct as the

Registrar of the respondent-University, cannot be looked

at, since that is not the reason cited in the impugned order

for his attachment. In this regard, he places reliance on

the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh

Gill and another v. The Chief Election Commissioner,

New Delhi and others, (1978) 1 SCC 405, and, in

particular, on paragraph no. 8 thereof.

7. We have heard the learned counsels, and

perused the record.

8. Having heard the learned counsels, we are of

the view that there is absolutely no merit in the first relief

sought by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. First

and foremost, the impugned order itself recites the

reasons for its issuance. The reason disclosed in the

impugned order is the ongoing administrative impasse in

the Uttarakhand Ayurved University. The further reason

disclosed is that, to be able to run the government works

smoothly and keeping in view of the interest of the

employees, it was found necessary to attach the petitioner

to the Office of the Secretary, AYUSH and AYUSH

Education till further orders.

9. Merely because the petitioner is the regularly

appointed Registrar of the respondent-University, it does

not follow that he could not be attached, as has been done

by the impugned order, since it is his own case that his

appointing authority is the State of Uttarakhand. We also

cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner is

embroiled in a serious case involving financial

irregularities, while functioning as the Registrar of the

respondent-University. It is clear to us that the

respondent-Government had two options. First, to keep

the petitioner suspended during the pendency of the

criminal case against him and to continue to pay him

subsistence allowance, and, the second, to revoke his

suspension and to ensure that he does not function as the

Registrar of the respondent-University, till so long as the

criminal proceedings against him are pending. To permit

the petitioner to again occupy the said office of the

Registrar of the respondent-University, and to function in

that capacity, would give the petitioner the opportunity to

cover his tracks, and tamper and destroy the evidence

that may be used against him.

10. Merely because the respondent-Government has

revoked the suspension of the petitioner, it does not follow

that he has a right to again occupy the same position,

while occupying which he is alleged to have committed

serious financial irregularities.

11. Reliance placed on Mohinder Singh Gill

(supra), in our view, is of no avail, since the impugned

order, even on the face of it, refers to the "ongoing

administrative impasse in the Uttarakhand Ayurved

University" and "to run government works smoothly and

keeping in view the interest of the employees", as the

reasons for the petitioner's attachment. These grounds

cited in the impugned order, in our view, are wide enough

to encompass within themselves the fact that the

petitioner is embroiled in a criminal case involving serious

financial irregularities, while discharging his duties as the

Registrar of the respondent-University.

12. So far as reliance placed on the order dated

23.10.2018, passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 338 of 2018,

is concerned, in our view, the same is misplaced. This is

for the reason that much water has flown under the

bridge, ever since the passing of the said order. It was

after the passing of the said order, that the F.I.R. was

registered, as aforesaid, and the petitioner was arrested

on 03.12.2018 by the Vigilance Department. The State of

Uttarakhand, being the employer, is entitled to require its

employee to remain attached to a particular office during

the continuation of criminal or departmental proceedings.

13. As we have noticed hereinabove, the only other

option available to the respondent-Government was to

keep the petitioner suspended during the pendency of the

criminal trial.

14. We, therefore, dismiss the Writ Petition qua the

first relief, with costs quantified at Rs. 20,000/- to be

deposited with the State Legal Services Authority within

two weeks.

15. So far as the second relief is concerned, we

issue notice.

16. Counsel for the respondents appears and

accepts notice. The respondents are directed to examine

the petitioner's claim for salary for the post of Registrar of

the respondent-University, and to file their response within

the next four weeks.

17. Rejoinder, if any, before the next date.

18. List this case on 27.02.2022.

________________ VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

_____________ R.C. KHULBE, J.

Dt: 21st September, 2022 Rahul