RAS BEHARI Vs. HARYANA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) The impugned order, of termination of service cannot be sustained having regard to the law laid down by this Court in Anoop Jaiswal v. Govt. of India, (1984) 2 SCC 369 (AIR 1984 SC 636); Indra Pal Gupta v. Managing Committee, Model Inter College. Thora, (1984) 3 SCC 384 : (AIR 1984 SC 1110). The appeal must therefore be allowed and the impugned order of termination must be quashed and set aside. As a consequential relief we will have to reinstate the appellant. However, complications will arise inasmuch as there is only one post of Assistant Agronomist. And as someone else has already been appointed to the said post his service may have to be terminated in order to make room for the appellant as appellant cannot be appointed on any other post in view of his special qualifications. Since the appellant does not insist on reinstatement, if he is awarded compensation in lieu thereof, payment of lump sum compensation will solve the problem to the satisfaction of both the sides. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the respondent University shall pay a sum of Rs . 1,60,000/- in full and final settlement of all the claims including the claim for compensation in lieu of reinstatement. salary for the intervening period, and his claim in regard to provident fund and gratuity etc. On payment of the said sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- the appellant shall have no other claim against the University. We may mention for the sake of record that in fixing the aforesaid amount we have taken into consideration the fact that the appellant was gainfully employed elsewhere.

(3.) We also consider it necessary to pass an order in the same terms as was passed in K. C. Joshi v. Union of India, (1985) 3 SCC 153 : (AIR 1985 SC 1046 at p. 1050) viz. :-