Dr. Deo Chandra Choudhary v. The L. N. Mithila University And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3398 of 2016 =========================================================== Dr. Deo Chandra Choudhary son of Late Tripta Narayan Choudhary, Resident of Village - Tatuar, P.O. - Tatuar, P.S. -Manigachi, District - Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The L. N. Mithila University Darbhanga through its Registrar
2. Vice Chancellor, L.N. Mithila University, Darbhanga.
3. Registrar, L.N. Mithila University, Darbhanga .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinav Srivastava Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ajay Behari Sinha Mr. Nadeem Siraj Mr. Chandra Mohan Singh =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the University.
An order of transfer passed against certain teachers of the University including the present petitioner, whose name figures at serial No.6, is the bone of contention in the present writ application. Petitioner wants quashing of the notification dated 25.01.2016, contained in Annexure-8. Annexure-8, in fact, has been issued in the background of the resolution/decision of the Transfer Committee, contained in Annexure-10.
Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the order of transfer is arbitrary, unreasonable and in violation of the statutory principles of the Bihar State Universities Act. He submits
Patna High Court CWJC No.3398 of 2016 dt.27-04-2016 that the Joint Transfer Committee could not take a decision on the transfer of the petitioner and that there was no clear directive issued by the Division Bench to effect a transfer.
For record, it may be noticed that an earlier decision of transfer taken against the petitioner and some other teachers were challenged before this Court. Since legal infirmities being found in the said decisions, those orders came to be quashed, which included a writ application of the present petitioner as well. Since the University was not satisfied with the decision rendered by the learned Single Judge, matter travelled to Division Bench. The decision of the Division has been brought on record by the petitioner himself as Annexure-7 and reading of the same does indicate that leeway was granted to the University to act in accordance with law.
There could not be a complete embargo on the powers of the Vice-Chancellor of the University effecting transfer merely because they did not follow the law or the procedure in the earlier decision.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3398 of 2016 dt.27-04-2016 people in view of a visit by the NAAC team for gradation of the institutions.
The submission of the counsel with regard to the validity of having a joint meeting of the Transfer Committee as well as the approval of the same by the Syndicate and its validity has been gone into by the Court. It does not find any infirmity in the two decisions. The two meeting dated 23.01.2016 are not required to be a prolonged deliberation running into days. Initially a picture was sought to be painted by the petitioner that such a decision was taken to target him or is being done for other oblique reason but the Court does not agree with the perception of the petitioner.
Perception of the petitioner cannot form the basis for interfering with the impugned order. The Court opines that there is no legal infirmity in the decision so taken in terms of Annexure-10 and if that is so, Annexure-8 is the natural corollary which is a follow-up notification to implement the decision of the Transfer Committee. Writ application is dismissed being devoid of merit. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) R.K.Pathak/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 28/04/2016 Transmission Date