GURBACHAN SINGH Vs. PUNJABI UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by way of the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the order dated 5.11.2003 (Annexure P-15) issued by respondent No. 1-Punjabi University Patiala whereby his retirement dues are not being settled on account of the fact that he directly corresponded with one M/s. Construct Data Verlag Gmbh Ortsstrasse 54-A-2331, Vosendorf, Austria to include the name of the Punjabi University, Patiala in its 'Fair Guide'. The petitioner also seeks the quashing of the order dated 5.10.2005 (Annexure P-20) declining to convert his premature/voluntary retirement into long leave without pay and also declining the ex post facto approval regarding sending order to M/s. Construct Data Publisher, Austria for 'Fair Guide' without seeking prior consent.

(2.) The petitioner, while he was working as Punjabi Professor at the Punjabi University, Patiala (respondent No. 1) applied for appointment as Professor in Punjabi in Delhi University (respondent No. 3). The age of retirement in Delhi University was 62 years whereas it was 60 years in Punjabi University. For the purpose of being relieved from Punjabi University, the petitioner initially gave three months advance notice on 1.1.2003 (Annexure P-1). On coming to know that he has been appointed he submitted another letter dated 3.3.2003 (Annexure P-2) for relieving him. However, on being informed by the officials of the Punjabi University that he could not be relieved, he sought premature retirement and was given a relieving certificate. The petitioner prays for cancellation of the order of premature voluntary retirement and instead he be relieved on account of his appointment as Punjabi Professor in Delhi University.

(3.) Written statement has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 in which it is stated that the petitioner had sought premature retirement and his request was accepted. He was voluntarily retired w.e.f. 31.3.2003. Thereafter, he joined as Professor in Delhi University. It is then that he came to know that since he had got voluntary retirement from Punjabi University, his pay would not be protected. Therefore, he started representing to the Punjabi University seeking cancellation of his order of voluntary retirement. Besides, it is submitted that there is no provision in the rules for transfer of the retiral benefits of the petitioner to the Delhi University. It is also submitted that the petitioner had placed orders with a foreign company on his own without any sanction or knowledge of the competent authority. The foreign company was now raising bills directly to the University for which the petitioner alone is to be blamed. The bills/accounts are liable to be settled by the petitioner as the Punjabi University authorities were not involved in the placement of such orders. It is stated that the allegations regarding the wrong advice said to have been given by the officials of the Punjabi University regarding his being relieved only on submitting request for premature retirement, are vague and are denied. It is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.