GH QADIR BHAT Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of writ petition No - 93 of 1978, Ghulam Qadir Bhat Versus University of Kashmir and ors, It writ petition No. 110 of 1978, Poshkar Nath Koul Versus University of Kashmir and ors and writ petition No. 122, Mobammad Shaffi Sheikh Vs. University of Kashmir and ors, as identical questions of law and facts are involved in these petitions.

(2.) POSHKAR Nath Kaul at the relevant time was serving as the Assistant Registrar in the University of Kashmir while petitioners Ghulam Qadir and Mohamad Shaffi Sheikh were serving as Senior Assistants in the same University. A case appears to have been registered against the petitioners by the Vigilance Commission under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006, and under Sections 16l/420/467/468/471 and 120 -B R.P, C. vide FIR No. 21 of 1976. The petitioners were subsequently arrested in connection with the said AIR and while proceedings were still pending, departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioners by the Kashmir University. On 10 -11 -1976 Dr. Z U. Ahmed, respondent No. 3 was appointed as an Enquiry Officer by the Vice -Chancellor of Kashmir University and he was directed to hold an enquiry into the "statement of allegations" against the petitioners, which were forwarded to him by the Vice -Chancellor through the Registrar. The Inquiry Officer sent the statement of charges to the petitioners and sought their written explanations to those charges on 11 -11 -1976. He subsequently held an enquiry and submitted his report. The report was accepted by the University and show cause notice was issued to the petitioners on 23 -5 -1977 as to why the penalty of dismissal of service be not imposed upon them. The petitioners submitted their explanations on different dates subsequent where to orders terminating the services of the petitioners from the University were passed. The said orders as well as the Inquiry proceedings have been called in question by the petitioners through these writ petitions on various grounds detailed in the petitions.

(3.) IT is not necessary for me to go into the various grounds of attack or the detailed facts which had to the institution of the enquiry against the petitioners because I find that these writ petitions reserve to be allowed on a short point,