SUBODH MITRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Affidavit-In-Opposition filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 today is taken on record. Affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the petitioner is also taken on record. The petitioner has filed the petition praying for the relief to issue direction upon the Vice-Chancellor to step down and to take appropriate step for holding disciplinary enquiry. Prayer has also been made to refund the entire amount spent for alcoholic beverages on duty as Vice-Chancellor of the Visva-Bharati.

(2.) It is averred in the petition that the respondent No. 5 is the Vice-Chancellor of Visva-Bharati. It is submitted that Statute 3(5) states emoluments and other conditions of service of Vice-Chancellor. A person in receipt of any pension his salary shall be fixed after taking into consideration such pension or other benefits. However, apparently Vice-Chancellor is drawing pension as well as full salary of the Vice-Chancellor, Pension of the Vice-Chancellor which he has been receiving ought to have been deducted from his salary. He is drawing pension from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. It is submitted that as per section 27(j) of the Visva-Bharati Act any person who had held any post and is in receipt of a pension or other form of retirement benefits is appointed as an adhyapaka of the University or to any other academic post the salary of such person together with the pension and other benefits shall not exceed the salary payable to him in accordance with the Statutes. Certain other allegations have been made-regarding conduct of the respondent No. 5 in paragraph 10 of the petition with respect to which there is no supportive materials in the petition. His tenure has been extended from 65 years to 70 years. It is also submitted that the respondent No. 5 is making Visva-Bharati to pay amount towards consumption of alcohol by him at public places on different times. Certain bills have been annexed to show that part of the bills pertained to alcoholic beverages. Violation of Rule 22 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 has been alleged. Various representations were submitted to the concerned authorities, but the representations have not been considered and as such the petition has been preferred.

(3.) The respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in their affidavit-in-opposition have contended that the petition is not maintainable for various reasons. There is no element of public interest involved. Public Interest Litigation has been sponsored by an employee of Visva-Bharati, namely, Nilanjan Banerjee, who has been placed under suspension and against whom disciplinary proceeding has been initiated by Visva-Bharati for serious misconduct. The petitioner has not made out any case for issuance of a Writ of Quo Warranto. It is not alleged by the petitioner that the respondent No. 5 is not eligible for appointment to the post of Vice-Chancellor of Visva-Bharati. The public Interest Litigation has been filed with intent of malicious propaganda and to defame the University's image. The petitioner claims to have derived information regarding the subject-matter of Public Interest Litigation from Shri Nilanjan Banerjee, employee facing Departmental Enquiry on serious charges. The petitioner had pre-planned media coverage at the time of filing the Public Interest Litigation. Various email messages have been sent to a large number of employees of the Visva-Bharati as also to various political personalities which tarnished the image of the Vice-Chancellor in the estimation of the employees of Visva-Bharati. Various electronic mail message were sent by the petitioner about filing of the petition itself. The petition has not been filed bona fide. The petitioner was questioned for hours by the C.B.I. in connection with the theft of Nobel Prize from Rabindra Bhavana. It is widely known in the locality that after interrogation, the petitioner decamped from West Bengal for a considerable long period of time. The last pay drawn by Dr. Dattagupta at Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (USER), Kolkata, was Rs. 80,000/- basic pay and D.A. was Rs. 40,800/- when he took over the office of the Vice-Chancellor in the respondent University. The Executive Council of Visva-Bharati has passed a resolution No. 34 dated 6.11.2011 and has resolved to protect the last basic pay drawn by the Vice-Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor of Visva-Bharati is tenure post for five years and he has drawn salary according to the guidelines, regulations etc. made by the Central Government and UGC from time to time applicable for Central Universities.