RAJENDER PRASAD KANSAL Vs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working as Deputy Registrar in Netaji Subhash Institute of Technology (to be referred as NSIT henceforth). He used to follow and implement the orders and policy decisions made by the Board of Governors(in short BOG) and General Council. In 2002 one Shri R.A. Agarwala was selected for appointment to the post of Prof, (Electronics) in the NSIT. The petitioner was not involved in the process of selection of said Prof. R.A. Agarwala. BOG and the competent Authority had finalised the selection of appointment. of' Prof. R.A Agarwala on the terms and conditions decided by the BOG. Sh. U.S. Nijjar, respondent No. 6, the then Joint Secretary, used to deal with all the files of administrative matters involving selection and appointment of the staff. D.S. Nijjar used to put various queries to the NSIT, raised certain objections and express his own opinions on the decisions arrived at by the Competent Authority i.e. BOG D.S. Nijjar was also instrumental and had played a leading role in all the important affairs of NSIT and appointment of Dr. Agarwala. He was present in the 23rd / 24th meetings of BOG which had considered the case of the appointment of Dr. Agarwala.

(2.) On 17th December, 2004 a memorandum was issued to the petitioner informing him that BOG proposed to hold an inquiry against him under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965. The said inquiry was in respect of issuing offer of appointment to Prof. R.A. Agarwala. The petitioner filed the reply on 17.03.2005. Sh. D.S. Nijjar, who was working as DIG(Prispns), Central Jail, Tihar, Hari Nagar was appointed as inquiry officer. It is alleged that he was appointed inquiry officer by the Directorate, which fully knew that Sh. Nijjar had been part and parcel of the decision making process and was present in the 23rd / 24th meetings of the BOG, wherein the case of appointment of Prof. Agarwala was considered. Request was made to change D.S. Nijjar but the needful was not done. On the contrary, the petitioner was directed to appear before him for a preliminary hearing on 25.04.2005 in Tihar Jail Complex. Prof. R.A. Agarwala superannuated in April 2006 at the age of 62 years from NSIT without any dispute and the abovesaid inquiry was conducted six months after his retirement.

(3.) The petitioner has enumerated the following grounds in support of his case. It is pointed out that inquiry is illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. Sh. D.S. Nijjar has been working in cahoots with the department for the last several years. He himself is a witness to the proceedings of the 23rd and 24th meetings of BOG. Mr. Nijjar was instrumental in the appointment of Prof. Agarwala and the department should proceed against Sh. D.S. Nijjar himself if they develop a notion that the appointment of Prof. Agarwala was improper or wrong. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had issued the offer of appointment to Prof. Agarwala in implementation of orders of the then BOG headed by the Chairman. The decision arrived by an earlier BOG cannot be overruled or changed by a successive BOG. Sh. D.S. Nijjar is working in the pay scale of 12,000-18,000, which is also the pay scale of the petitioner and hence the inquiring authority is not of a higher rank than the petitioner. A man cannot be a Judge in his own cause, because order of implementation of Prof. R.A. Agarwala was arrived at in the presence of Sh. Nijjar. The petitioner is being forced to appear before the inquiry authority in Tihar Jail, which is full of criminals and would not be a suitable place for conducting a departmental inquiry. It was, therefore, prayed that order dated 17.03.2005 appointing Sh. D.S.Nijjar as enquiry authority be quashed and memorandum dated 17.12.2004 / 22.12.2004 along with the statement of Article of Charge, Statement of Imputation of Misconduct being illegal be quashed. Lastly, CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 are not applicable to the employees of NSIT, which is a registered society under Societies Registration Act, 1961.