SASANKA SEKHAR DEBNATH Vs. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed to the post of Chief Medical Officer, Visva Bharati by a letter dated April 30 of 2007 from the Registrar of Visva Bharati. By the order impugned dated December 01, 2020, issued by the Registrar (Acting) of Visva Bharati, he was directed to act as a 'Medical Officer' till the disposal of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. By the said order another doctor attached to the University was directed to take care of the administrative responsibility of the hospital of the University and to function as the interim in-charge of Chief Medical Officer of the said hospital in addition to his normal duties.

(2.) The University initiated a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner on the basis of an alleged dereliction of duty perceived by it as a misconduct.

(3.) It has been argued by Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya, Senior Advocate, that the respondent authorities could not have reduced the rank/position of the petitioner from the post of Chief Medical Officer to Medical Officer simultaneously with the issuance of chargesheet. Mr. Bhattacharya submits that the order impugned in the writ petition amounts to reduction in rank of the petitioner even before the commencement of the disciplinary proceedings. Mr. Bhattacharya submits that the Chief Medical Officer is a post superior to the post of Medical Officer with a higher pay scale and responsibility. He refers to Rule 49 (vi) of the Service Rules for Non-Academic Employees of the Visva-Bharati to suggest that the order impugned constitutes a punishment within the meaning of the said Rules. The petitioner has been reduced in rank from the Chief Medical officer to Medical Officer as punishment without conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.