V.N. TRIPATHI Vs. PANJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff is in second appeal, against the judgment of reversal passed by the learned Additional District Judge, whereby judgment and decree of the learned trial Court, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, were set aside and the suit of the plaintiff was ordered to be dismissed.

(2.) Briefly put, the facts of the case as noticed by the learned first appellant court in paras 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment, are that the plaintiff was appointed as a Lecturer in the applied Mathematics, department of Mathematics, Panjab University, Chandigarh, where he joined on 17.1.1974 against a regular post, in accordance with the provisions of the Panjab University Calender Vol.I, governing the appointments of Teachers. He was desirous of undertaking research and advance work in his own field. Since he had served the Panjab University for more than 6 years, he applied for the grant of Sabbatical leave on 7.6.1985 with effect from 1.9.1985 to Februrary 1986, on full salary and from March 1, 1986 to April 30, 1986 on half pay salary as per University Regulations with permission to combine the said leave with the summer vacations in May/June, 1986 stating that Mosul University had granted him Air Travel and had agreed to issue him entry visa. The brief summary of the work, the scope of further work and the photo copy of a telegram to show that Mosul University had agreed to grant Air Travel and entry visa were also attached with the application. It was pointed out by him to defendant No.2 that he wanted to proceed to Iraq on September 1, 1985, so that the decision regarding his leave may be taken. He made another application to defendant No.2 on 19.6.1985 and copy of the letter received from the Head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Mosul was also attached. The protracted correspondence ensued between him and the defendant University, but no final action was taken by the defendant University. It is alleged that his programme was time bound in the Mosul University which was clearly indicated by him in his application for grant of Sabbatical Leave and subsequent correspondence. Defendant University with mala fide intention to harass, humiliate and defame him was not taking any decision on the application. In the alternative, he had also made it clear that in case the defendant University does not decide to grant Sabbatical leave for any reason, he be treated on leave without salary, without prejudice to his right for Sabbatical Leave. Ultimately, he left for Iraq on 4.9.1985 before his leave was sanctioned in anticipation of defendant University's approval. Republic of Iraq had issued Air Tickets at its cost and the programme was time bound, he had no other choice except to proceed to Iraq on the hope that the defendant University would take favourable decision. On 18.10.1985, he received letter from defendant University that it was recommended to the Senate that he be asked to resume duty on 27.11.1985, at the latest, failing which, his post held by him would stand declared vacant. This letter was replied to in detail by him on 2.11.1985. The Deputy Registrar, Panjab University conveyed the orders of the Vice Chancellor, defendant No.2 to him vide order dated 19.9.1985, according to which, he was asked to resume his duty within one month, from the date of issuance of the letter, failing which the post of Lecturer in the University shall be liable to be declared vacant under Regulation 11.9 of Panjab University Calendar. It is further alleged that the defendants did not wait for the period given in the letter dated 19.9.1985 and placed the matter before the Syndicate, which was considered by it on 17.10.1985. The leave applied for was refused on the basis of the distorted picture placed before it.

(3.) The Deputy Registrar, Panjab University vide letter dated 7.12.1985 addressed to him informed that in pursuance of the decision of the Senate, dated 27.10.1985 the post of Lecturer held by him in the department of mathematics stood declared vacant with effect from 28.11.1985. It is alleged that there was mala fide on the part of defendant No.2 on the ground that no action was taken for about 3 months on his application for Sabbatical leave. Defendant No.2 was nourishing grouse against him as he had filed a Civil Writ Petition No.4587 of 1984 and then Special Leave Petition No.12081 of 1984 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India claiming the benefit of promotion scheme. He had made representation dated 8.8.1985 to the Vice Chancellor, Panjab University, through proper channel levelling serious allegations against defendant No.2. Earlier extra ordinary leave without salary was granted to him from December, 1980 to June 1983, but it did not debar him from claiming Sabbatical leave. Defendant did not consider the certificate issued by Professor S.M.J. Ali, dated 23.9.1985. His post was declared vacant without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard without issuing show cause notice and without holding proper enquiry. It is against the principle of natural justice. In these circumstances, he assailed the decision of the defendant University.