Dr. Ajay Pratap v. Aryabhatta Knowledge University, Patna Through Its Registrar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5638 of 2018 ====================================================== Dr. Ajay Pratap, Son of Sri Raghubir Narayan Singh, Resident of Flat No. 201 Krishna Kunj Apartment, S.K. Nagar, Road No-8, East Boring Canal Road, Patna- 800001.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Aryabhatta Knowledge University, Patna Through Its Registrar.

2. The Vice Chancellor, Aryabhatta Knowledge University, Patna.

3. The Registrar, Aryabhatta Knowledge University, Patna.

4. The Registrar In-charge cum Examination Controller, Aryabhatta Knowledge University, Patna.

5. Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Registrar In-charge cum Examination Controller, Aryabhatta Knowledge University, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhay Shankar Singh Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Priyank Deepak Mr. Raj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 30-03-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 06.03.2018 contained in Annexure-14 whereby the petitioner has been put under suspension and an inquiry was constituted comprising of three persons and enquiry Committee was directed to submit a report within two months.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner repeatedly requested the University to provide the materials on which the University is proceeding ahead against him, but he was not supplied those documents. At the relevant time, while the petitioner was incharge Registrar the petitioner received a document contained in Annexure-8 it is contended

Patna High Court CWJC No.5638 of 2018(2) dt.30-03-2018 2/3 that the Respondent No. 5 has relied upon a mark-sheet where against the maximum marks 25, he got 125 marks, which is indicative of manipulation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Annexure-8 is the reason for action against this petitioner as he has learnt about the manipulation of the respondent no. 5 in procuring job in the University. Learned counsel also submitted that despite repeated request petitioner was not provided with the document on which the respondents have relied upon for initiating proceeding against the petitioner.

In view of the above, the Court deems it fit and proper to dispose of the writ application with a direction to the University that the University will provide all the relevant documents on which the charges, subject-matter of the inquiry against the petitioner vide Annexure-14 are based. The Respondents are also required to provide all those documents, which are relevant for the purposes of submitting effective reply and defence in the inquiry by the petitioner. It goes without saying that the inquiry committee will provide reasonable opportunity to the petitioner before submitting any report in the present case.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5638 of 2018(2) dt.30-03-2018 3/3 months, the order of suspension against the petitioner will stand revoked automatically.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) ajay gupta/- U