Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Dr. Rajiv Chopra vs University Of Delhi & Ors on 29 June, 2020

Author: Jyoti Singh

Bench: Jyoti Singh

$~A-21
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 3266/2020 & C.M. APPL. 11447/2020 & 12563/2020

      DR. RAJIV CHOPRA                                ..... Petitioner
                    Through:          Mr. Anand Nandan, Advocate

                         versus

      UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.          ..... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Sachin Datta, Sr. Advocate with
                             Mr. M.J.S. Rupal, Standing Counsel
                             with Ms. Akanksha Kaul & Mr.
                             Manek Singh, Advocates for R-1
                             Mr. Pritish Sabharwal, Advocate for
                             R-2
                             Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha, Advocate
                             for R-3/UGC
                             Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate for
                             R-4

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
                   ORDER

% 29.06.2020 Hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing. One of the grounds raised by the Petitioner in the present petition is that he has been removed from the post of OSD without the prior approval of the Vice Chancellor of the University. University was directed to produce the file wherein the Vice Chancellor has granted the approval, as a categorical stand of the University is that the impugned action has been taken only after the approval of the VC, in terms of the relevant Ordinance.

Ms. Kaul has taken the Court through the emails in this regard and submits that the same being confidential cannot be shared with the Petitioner. Attention of the Court is drawn to the email whereby the Vice Chancellor has granted approval for repatriation of the Petitioner, back to his parent College. She submits that on account of the unprecedented pandemic, the office of the Vice Chancellor is transacting routine work only through emails and therefore, the approval is also through email. There is no separate file with notings, which is the procedure, in normal circumstances.

Mr. Nandan, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the University should be directed to file an affidavit in support of this stand and the same be shared with the Petitioner.

The Acting Registrar, Delhi University is directed to file an affidavit to the effect that physical files are not being used and the official work is being executed in the office of the VC, through the electronic mode, on account of the pandemic. The affidavit will specifically indicate the date of approval by the Vice Chancellor, for repatriation of the Petitioner.

Affidavit will be filed within two days from today. Copy of the Affidavit will be shared with learned counsel for the Petitioner.

Arguments have been concluded on behalf of all the parties. Judgment reserved.

JYOTI SINGH, J JUNE 29, 2020 rd