NILANJAN ROY Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICALS DOP MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZER NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition is at the instance of an Associate Professor in the Department of Biotechnology with the National Institute of Pharmaceuticals Education and Research (NIPER) against the said Institute, the Union and the Chief Officials of NIPER namely the Officiating Director, the Dean and the Acting Registrar seeking to quash the order passed constituting an enquiry and removing the petitioner from several institutional Committees and constituting an enquiry for some alleged misconduct. THE petitioner has alleged mala fides against the respondents for constituting the enquiry. Before the arguments got under-way, learned counsel appearing for the respondents stated that the enquiry has been completed and it only awaited the final stage of submission of report. Having regard to the subsequent event after the institution of the writ petition, when the enquiry constituted against the petitioner has passed through several stages, I had asked the counsel for the petitioner to only argue on the preliminary point of whether the constitution of the enquiry itself was vitiated. THE argument has, therefore, proceeded against the competency of the Officiating Director to institute the enquiry.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner would contend that he was only Officiating Director and at the time when the enquiry was constituted on 24.03.2011, his tenure of office as Officiating Director had already expired and therefore, he was not competent to initiate the enquiry. Through the impugned order dated 24.03.2011, he had also been suspended and such power of suspension also did not reside with the Officiating Director. The office of the Director is a creature of statute and therefore, it would become necessary to examine the power of the Director as delineated under the Act. The NIPER has been established under the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research Act of 1988. It has been enacted to declare the institution of NIPER to be an institution of national importance and to provide for its incorporation and matters connected therewith. Director as defined under Section 3 (e) is the Director of the Institute appointed under Section 16 of the Act. Section 16 (1) allows for the appointment of the Director with the prior approval of the Visitor. The relevant portion of Section 16 is reproduced to examine his powers:-

(3.) THE power to take disciplinary action against the employees surely, therefore, resides with the Director. It would be immaterial that he was not himself the Appointing Authority so long as the Rules specifically provide for such a course.