National Institute Of Technology v. Angrej Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CR-7679-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 24, 2026 National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra
...Petitioner
Versus
Angrej Sharma
...Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI
Present:
Ms.Mehak, Advocate for Mr.Shyam Singh Chhokar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Dhiraj Chawal and Mr.Kanverpal Singh Gill, Advocates for the respondent.
**** ARCHANA PURI, J.
CM-2945-CII-2026 The present application has been filed for placing on record Annexure A-1.
Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the same is allowed and Annexure A-1 is taken on record. CM-2946-CII-2026 The present application has been filed for preponemnt of the main case i.e. CR-7679-2019, which is fixed for 28.04.2026 to any shortest possible date.
-2Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the same is allowed and the main case i.e. CR-7679-2019 is preponed and taken up today itself.
CM-2947-CII-2026 The instant application has been filed by the respondent for disposal of the revision petition in terms of judgment dated 23.12.2025 passed in CR-7806-2019 (Annexure A-1), as the issue involved herein is similar and squarely covered by the said judgment. Counsel for the petitioner has also made a statement that she has no objection, if the revision petition is decided, in terms of the prayer made in the present application, as it is fully covered by the judgment dated 23.12.2025 passed in CR-7806-2019 (Annexure A-1). As such, the present application is also allowed and CR-7679-2019, as already observed aforesaid, is taken up for hearing today itself. The present revision petition has been filed by the National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra, through its Director for setting aside of the judgment dated 16.11.
2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Presiding Officer, Education Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kurukshetra. The factual background of the case, as mentioned in the impugned judgment and as narrated in the applications aforesaid, is same as was adjudicated upon in CR-7806-2019.
It is the case of appointment of the respondent as security guard on 07.04.2008 by the petitioner-Institute and his services were terminated on 27.05.2010, without compliance of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes
-3Act, 1947 and other statutory protections, provided under the Act. The respondent-workman, along with other similarly situated workmen, had further assailed the order of his termination and the proceedings, as such, were further conducted and the matter, ultimately was taken up by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Delhi. However, vide order dated 24.07.2019, it was held that it was not maintainable on the ground that the petitioner-Institute is situated in District Kurukshetra. Thereupon, the matter was remanded to Education Tribunal, District Kurukshetra. However, the Educational Tribunal, Kurukshetra, vide order dated 16.11.
2019 held that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute, while observing that National Institute of Technology is an instrumentality of Government of India and a deemed University and it is not by any stretch of imagination, an aided or un-aided educational institute of State Government. Consequently, the matter was sent back to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Delhi, for further proceedings. Being aggrieved by the requisite order, the petitioner-Institute had filed the revision petition.
The bunch of 24 connected revision petitions, raising identical question of fact and law, were taken by this Court and finally decided vide judgment dated 23.12.2025. It was therein held that the Education Tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes relating to termination of services of temporary employees/security guards of the National Institute of Technology, which is a creation of Central Government and therefore, the Central Government Rules are applicable. It was specifically held that such matters could not be adjudicated by the Education Tribunal and statutory
-4remedy available under the Industrial Disputes Act, cannot be excluded, as a specific mechanism has been provided for redressal of grievance of regular/temporary employees of NIT. While observing aforesaid, it was held by this Court in the judgment dated 23.12.2025 that the impugned judgment, brooks no interference, in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction and consequently, dismissed the revision petitions, as being devoid of merits.
As submitted in the applications and as evident from the impugned judgment, the applicant-respondent, who was also a temporary employee/security guard in the National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra, was similarly placed. It raises identical question of fact and law and thus, being similarly placed and similar orders having been passed, with regard to the litigation, prior to it reached the Education Tribunal, Kuruskehtra and moreover, the facts of present revision petition, being covered by the judgment dated 23.12.2025 passed in the bunch of revision petitions i.e. CR-7806-2019 and others, wherein, the impugned order was upheld and revision petitions were dismissed, the present revision petition, on same parity, is hereby dismissed.
February 24, 2026 (ARCHANA PURI) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No