D K NAGAR Vs. UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 4/11-1-1993, by which he has been reverted on the post of Assistant Professor from the post of Assistant.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Professor vide order dated 31. 10. 1980 on temporary basis and he joined the said post of 1. 11. 1980. THE petitioner was confirmed by order dated 28. 1. 1986 w. e. f. 9. 11. 1985.

(3.) THE petitioner thereafter again returned back to Ohio and completed his assignment. On return he has submitted the joining report on 18. 05. 1989 and he was not allowed to join. A representation was submitted on 5. 09. 1991 to the Vice Chancellor and ultimately, a letter dated 17. 2. 1993 (Exhibit-18) was written to the Registrar that in accordance with the Syndicate Resolution No. 11 dated 18. 1. 1992 the petitioner under-takes to abide by the decision of the Syndicate. THE petitioner was informed vide letter dated 6/21. 3. 1992 that the letter received on 8. 02. 1992 is not in consonance with the Resolution passed by the Syndicate on 18. 1. 1992 and, therefore, he was requested to send an affidavit in terms of resolution No. 15 dated 30. 12. 1988. THE petitioner in his letter dated 21. 05. 1992 has reproduced the submissions of Mr. Sharma as mentioned in the judgment and on the basis of that he submitted that the joining report dated 18. 05. 1989 has already been submitted and, therefore, he should be paid arrears of salary. Another letter dated 22. 4. 1992 was also submitted by the petitioner. THE petitioner was informed by letter dated 23/25. 11. 1992 that he has not appeared before the Committee on 20. 11. 1992 at 3. 00 PM in the V. C. Secretariat, University Campus, Jaipur and the next meeting to review the case and recommend the action for consideration of the Syndicate will be held on 1. 12. 1992. He was informed that the Committee has desired that an opportunity for personal hearing be given to him and in case he does not appear, it will be presumed that he has nothing to say in the matter. Instead of appearing on 1. 12. 1992, a letter was written on 30. 11. 1992 by the petitioner to the Registrar that for what reason the Committee has been formed and who are the members of the Committee and he has not received copy of the resolution No. 16. Ultimately, the Syndicate reviewed the whole position and recommended that the petitioner who was appointed as Associate Professor in Statistics on probation be reverted to" the post of Assistant Professor w. e. f. 28. 10. 1988, the date from which he has been treated as wilfully absent from duty as it was the Syndicate's resolution No. 15 dated 30. 12. 1988. It was further resolved that the period of absence from duty has been treated as on leave without pay w. e. f. 28. 10. 1988 till he resumes his duty as Assistant Professor in Statistics. It is this order, which has been challenged in the present writ petition.