GUJARAT HOMEOPATHIC SOCIETY Vs. JAYANTILAL RAMANLAL JAYASWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this Letters Patent Appeal, the judgement of the learned Single Judge dated 07-11-2003, passed in Special Civil Application No.2269 of 1988, has been challenged by the appellant.

(2.) Service of respondent, Jayantilal Ramanlal Jaiswal, Head of Pharmacy Department of Homeopathy Medical College & Hospital, Anand, was terminated by order dated 19-02-1988. The appellant, Gujarat Homeopathic Society, is registered under the Indian Societies Registration Act. It manages the Homeopathic Medical College and Hospital, a recognised Institute established under the Gujarat Homeopathic Act, 1963, for offering four years' diploma course. The respondent alleges that the Council, established under the said Act, is controlled by the State Government; it regulates the functioning of the College under the Act and the Regulations made thereunder. The College is recognised under the Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973, under which the Homeopathy (Minimum Standards of Education) Regulations, 1983 are framed.

(3.) Initially, the respondent joined as a labourer and later on became a Professor in Homeopathy. He resigned on October 2, 1980, for personal reasons. He was issued Certificate of Excellence by the Principal. Thereafter, he was invited by the College and appointed as a full time Professor by order dated August 31, 1981 in the pay scale of Rs.700-1500. The respondent claimed higher pay scale. He issued a notice to the College to that effect on 19-12-1985. Subsequently, he filed Regular Civil Suit No. 228 of 1986 seeking pay scale of Rs.1100-1600. While his service was terminated, the Suit was pending. The appellant felt annoyed due to the filing of the Suit by the respondent, issued notice dated September 3, 1986 to the respondent, levelling allegations, and called upon the respondent to show cause as to why disciplinary proceedings be not initiated against him, since the allegations were of serious nature, which undermined the reputation of the Institute. The respondent contested these allegations through reply dated 07-09-1986. The persons who made allegations against the respondent were not examined at the inquiry. During the proceedings of inquiry, the respondent filed Regular Civil Suit No.25 of 1987 challenging the inquiry on various grounds. Civil Court passed interim injunction against holding of inquiry, though, at that time, his service had been terminated, the Suit was pending, and the interim injunction operating. Despite, inquiry report was made on 04-07-1987, charge of misconduct was not established. The charge of misconduct and version of Principal against the respondent was not established. Rather, it was found that the Principal had created unnecessary nuisance, and his statements were not reliable. However, it was recommended that the respondent may not be appointed as an Examiner. It appears that the Council had passed a Resolution on July 30, 1987 deciding to "file" the matter against the respondent. At this stage also, the Suit was pending, and the injunction against the inquiry was operative. Therefore, the inquiry could not have been continued against the respondent. Thereafter, on February 19, 1988, the impugned order terminating the services of the respondent was passed.