PRITISH KUMAR VARADWAJ Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was working as Assistant Professor in the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad, has come up in this writ petition challenging the order dated 26/10/2012, passed by the respondent no.4, by which the services of the petitioner has been terminated treating him to be a probationer.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are: Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the "IIIT, Allahabad") is a deemed University within the meaning of Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act,1956"). The institute is being run by the Society namely: Indian Institute of Information and Technology, Allahabad. The Society has its registered Memorandum of Association and Rules. The Society has also framed Recruitment and Service Rules namely: Recruitment and Service Rules Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad which were enforced with effect from November 18, 1999 duly approved by the Board of Governors of IIIT, Allahabad.

(3.) The petitioner was earlier appointed as a Faculty Associate vide order dated 11/7/2004 for a period of 3 years. On 03/9/2006, the post of Faculty Associate was converted/re-designated as Lecturer. The petitioner joined his service on 15/7/2004. The work and conduct of the petitioner was appraised and in the First Appraisal Report dated 03/5/2008, it was mentioned "performance appraisal over 4 years found quite satisfactory". In the same Office Memorandum, recommendation was made for continuation and consideration for Assistant Professor after award of Ph.D. Degree. In the 2nd appraisal report dated 09/8/2009, his tenure was extended for one more year. The petitioner was selected for appointment as Assistant Professor vide appointment letter dated 06/6/2010. The appointment of the petitioner was on probation for a period of one year from the date of joining. Petitioner continued to discharge his duties as Assistant Professor, satisfactorily without any blemish. By letter dated 16/5/2012, issued by the Director, IIIT-Allahabad, Faculty members were informed about the performance appraisal of Lecturers which was scheduled to be conducted on 25th and 26th June,2012. The petitioner appeared before the Appraisal Committee on 26/6/2012. A letter dated 28/9/2012, was issued by the Director, IIIT informing the petitioner that the Performance Appraisal Committee recommended "Performance very poor and unsatisfactory. He be discontinued from his services of the Institute with immediate effect". The Board of Management held its meeting on 29/6/2012, accepted the above recommendations and decided to terminate the services of the petitioner under Clause 10 (i) of the Terms and Conditions of Service of the appointment letter issued on 06/6/2010. The petitioner was communicated that if he wish to submit any explanation, he may do so by 15/10/2012. Petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 56139/2012, challenging the letter dated 28/9/2012, which was entertained by this Court. The respondents contended before the Court that letter dated 28/9/2012, is only a show cause notice to which a reply has to be there so that another order may be passed either in favour or against the petitioner. The Court granted time to the respondents to file a counter affidavit by order dated 19/10/2012. The petitioner submitted his reply on 22/10/2012. One of the issue raised in the reply was that the petitioner's probation which was for a period of one year having not been extended, he shall be treated to be automatically confirmed. After receiving the reply of the petitioner dated 22/10/2012, the same was placed before a sub-committee who after considering the documents in detail gave a report that the explanation of the petitioner is not satisfactory, hence the decision taken by the Board of Management be not changed. The Board of Management in its meeting dated 23/10/2012, considered the report of the sub-committee, the show cause notice dated 28/9/2012 and reply of the petitioner and decided to maintain its decision terminating the services of the petitioner and to implement the order of termination. The Director IIIT-Allahabad, vide its letter dated 26/10/2012, informed the petitioner about the said decision. Subsequently, a consequential letter dated 27/10/2012, was issued to the petitioner asking him to vacate the official accommodation.