Jayanta Kumar Sarma v. Krishna Kanta Handique State Open University and 2 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010125492024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/2628/2024o JAYANTAoKUMARoSARMAo S/O-oLATEoDEBENDRAoNATHoSARMA,oR/O-oC/4,oGIRIoNIWAS,oKHARGULI,o P.O.oUZANBAZAR,oP.S.oLATASIL,oDIST.oKAMRUP(M),oPIN-o781004,oASSAM VERSUSo KRISHNAoKANTAoHANDIQUEoSTATEoOPENoUNIVERSITYoANDo2oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoITSoREGISTRAR,oRESHAMoNAGAR,oKHANAPARA,o GUWAHATIo781022,oDISToKAMRUPoMoASSAM 2:THEoVICEoCHANCELLOR oKRISHNAoKANTAoHANDIQUEoSTATEoOPENoUNIVERSITY oRESHAMoNAGAR,oKHANAPARA oGUWAHATIo781022,oDISToKAMRUPoMoASSAM 3:BOARDoOFoMANAGEMENT oKRISHNAoKANTAoHANDIQUEoSTATEoOPENoUNIVERSITY oRESHAMoNAGAR,oKHANAPARA,oGUWAHATIo781022 oDISToKAMRUPoMoASSAo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oMoKoCHOUDHURY,oMR.oMoSARMA,MRoPoBHARDWAJo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oMR.oKoNoCHOUDHURYo(R-o1oTOo3),oAoDEY(R-o1oTOo3),MR.oPoJo PHUKAN(R-o1oTOo3)oo oLinkedoCaseo:oWA/102/2024 KRISHNAoKANTAoHANDIQUEoSTATEoOPENoUNIVERSITYoANDo2oORS REPRESENTEDoBYoITSoREGISTRAR oRESHAMoNAGAR,oKHANAPARA,oGUWAHATIo781022 oDISToKAMRUPoMoASSAM 2:oTHEoVICEoCHANCELLOR KRISHNAoKANTAoHANDIQUEoSTATEoOPENoUNIVERSITY oRESHAMoNAGAR,oKHANAPARA Page No.# 2/4 GUWAHATI 781022, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM 3: BOARD OF MANAGEMENT KRISHNA KANTA HANDIQUE STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY RESHAM NAGAR, KHANAPARA, GUWAHATI 781022 DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM VERSUS JAYANTA KUMAR SARMA AND ANR S/O-LATE DEBENDRA NATH SARMA R/O-C/4, GIRI NIWAS KHARGULI, P.O. UZANBAZAR P.S. LATASIL, DIST. KAMRUP(M) PIN-781004, ASSAM 2:UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION. BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG. NEW DELHI-110002. ------------ Advocate for : MR. K N CHOUDHURY Advocate for : SC U G C appearing for JAYANTA KUMAR SARMA AND ANR Linked Case : JAYANTA KUMAR SARMA VERSUS KRISHNA KANTA HANDIQUE STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY AND 2 ORS E

For applicant(s)/appellant(s) : Mr. M. K. Choudhury, Sr. Advocate

Mr. P. Bhardwaj, Advocate

For respondent(s) : – BEFORE – HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

24.09.2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)

The matter comes up for consideration of the Interlocutory Application (Civil) No. 2628/2024 with the prayer to condone the delay of 28 days in filing the connected Page No.# 3/4 review petition seeking review of the order dated 22.04.2024, passed by this Court in W.A. No. 102/2024.

¶2This Court, vide the said order dated 22.02.2024, has dismissed the writ appeal filed on behalf of the non-applicant university, however, has granted liberty to the non-applicant university to proceed against the present applicant/review petitioner by providing opportunity of hearing to him. It has also been observed that, while doing so, the respondent university is not required to adhere to the procedure laid down under the Service Rules of 2019.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in similar type of situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 16.04.2024, rendered in Civil Appeal No(s). ____ of 2024 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 8788-8789 of 2023 : Sandeep Kumar vs. GB Pant Institute of Engineering and Technology Ghurdauri & Ors.), has ruled that the respondent institute can initiate disciplinary proceedings against the incumbent while following the procedure laid down under the rules. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant/review petitioner that since the case of the applicant/review petitioner is similar to the above-referred case, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has passed the order dated 16.06.2024, the order

22.04.2024 passed by this Court in W.A. No. 102/2024 may kindly be reviewed and the relevant part of the order dated 22.04.2024, whereby liberty has been granted to the non-applicant university of proceeding against the applicant/review petitioner without adhering to the Service Rules of 2019, may kindly be deleted from the order.

¶4Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and after going through the material available on record, we are of the view that the facts of Sandeep Kumar (supra) are quite distinguishable from the facts of the case of the applicant/review petitioner herein. In the case of Sandeep Kumar (supra), the institute had terminated the services of the incumbent while relying on the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Governors held on 16.06.2018. However, the Hon'ble Page No.# 4/4 Supreme Court found that in the said minutes no such observation regarding the qualification, etc. of the incumbent had been recorded and, as such, the reliance placed by the institute on the said minutes of the meeting was erroneous.

¶5In the present case, no such situation is there. Hence, we do not find any case for review.

¶6In such circumstances, this Interlocutory Application and the connected Review Petition No. 7071/2024 (Filing Number) are dismissed.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant