Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Gagandeep Kaur vs Post Graduate Institute Of Medical ... on 11 January, 2023
1- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
Chandigarh, this the 11th day of January 2023
(Reserved on: 02.01.2023)
HON'BLE SH. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)
I. Original Application No.060/1095/2022
1. Kanwaljeet Kaur (File No. 1348), Age 49 years, W/o Tirlochan Singh,
working as Senior Nursing Officer, Advance Trauma Center, OPD,
PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh, R/o #2068/1, Sector 47/C, Chandigarh.
2. Surinder Kaur (File No. 1572), Age 52 years, W/o Sh. Bhupinder Singh,
working as Senior Nursing Officer, New Emergency Operation, Theater,
PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh, R/o # 99, Sector 62, Mohali.
3. Pallavi Gautam (File No. 4211), Age 29 years, d/o Sh. Gulshan Kumar,
working as Nursing Officer, Advance Pediatric Center, PGIMER, Sector 12,
Chandigarh, R/o# Nivedita Hostel, PGIMER, Chandigarh.
4. Monika Sharma (File No. 3040), Age 39 years, W/o Sh. Ved Parkash
Sharma, working as Nursing Officer, Advance Cardiac Center OPD,
PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh, R/o # 903, Dashmesh Nagar, Nayagaon,
Mohali.
5. Renju S. Varghese (File No. 3191), Age 35 years, S/o Sh. Varghese
Mathew, working as Nursing Officer, Advance Pediatric Center OT,
PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh, R/o # 3333/1, Sector 32-D,
Chandigarh.6. Pramod Kumar (File No. 3201), Age 32 years, S/o Sh.
Bhagwan Sahay, working as Nursing Officer, CTVS ICU (Nursing),
PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh, R/o #652, Gali No. 8, Vikas Nagar,
Nayagaon, Mohali.
7. Priyanka Kumari (File No. 3275), Age 31 years, W/o Sh. Anil Kumar,
working as Nursing Officer, Nursing Department, PGIMER, Sector 12,
Chandigarh, R/o # 1045, Block-B, Sector 6, Eco-City No. 1, New
Chandigarh, Mohali.
8. Dilpreet Kaur (File No. 2813), Age 34 years, W/o Sh. Harmanpreet Singh,
working as Nursing Officer, ICCU (ACC), PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh,
R/o 2718, Sunny Enclave, Sector 125, Mohali.
9. Shobhna Thakur (File No. 2271), Age 37 years, D/o Sh. B.R. Thakur,
working as Nursing Officer, Nursing (COVID Vaccination Unit), PGIMER,
Sector -12, Chandigarh, R/o # 26, 1st Floor, Block-G, Sector 99, Mohali.
2- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022
10. Prem Lata (File No. 2387), Age 39 years, W/o Sh. Chandra Pal Singh,
working as Nursing Officer, CTU Ward, PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh,
R/o # 300/13, A-Block, Adarsh Nagar, Nayagaon, Mohali.
....Applicants
(By Advocate: Sh. Barjesh Mittal)
Versus
1. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER),
Sector 12, Chandigarh - 160012 through its Director.
2. Medical Superintendent, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and
Research (PGIMER), Sector 12, Chandigarh-160012.
... .Respondents
(By Advocate: Ms. Sukhmani Patwalia)
II. Original Application No. 060/1137/2022
Gagandeep Kaur wife of Sh. Harkirat Singh Sandhu age 33 years resident of
House No. 179, Phase 3B-1 (Sector 60), SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab.
.....Applicant
(By Advocate: Sh. P.M. Kansal)
Versus
1. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER),
Sector 12, Chandigarh-160012 through its Director.
2. Medical Superintendent (MS), Medical Superintendent, Post Graduate
Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Sector 12,
Chandigarh - 160012.
(By Advocate: Ms. Sukhmani Patwalia)
ORDER
Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA MEMBER (J):-
1. Since the facts, the law points and the relief claimed in both the Original Applications are similar, therefore, these OAs are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from O.A. No. 060/1095/2022 titled Kanwaljeet Kaur and Others Vs. Union of India & Others.
2. The applicants have challenged the impugned office order dated 13.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) to the extent of incorporating certain stipulations/conditions, while granting NOC for applying in the M.Sc (Nursing) Course in Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot (hereinafter refer to as BFUHS) Main campus only. They have prayed that the appropriate directions 3- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 be issued to respondent authorities to review/re-consider their case and to forthwith grant permission /NOC to them to pursue M.Sc. Nursing Course for the Session 2022-23 and accordingly to relieve them immediately to join/attend their 1st year M.Sc. classes.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that the applicants joined the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (hereinafter refer to as PGIMER) on various dates between 1994-2017 on the post of Nursing Officer and few of them have since been promoted to the cadre of Senior Nursing Officer. The „BFUHS issued prospectus for holding "Punjab Master of Sciences (Nursing) Entrance Test (PMNET-2022) for admission to M.Sc. (Nursing Courses) for the Session 2022-23. The last date of submission of online application was 19.09.2022. The applicants, being desirous and eligible to appear in the said examination, submitted representations dated 08.09.2022 and 14.09.2022 to Respondent No. 2 seeking „No Objection Certificate‟ to appear in the entrance examination. They submitted their online applications on the website of BFUHS for appearing in the PMNET-2022 for admission to M.Sc. Nursing Course and also deposited the requisite application fee of Rs.5900/-.
4. It has further been pleaded that Respondent No. 2 did not revert to the representation submitted by the applicants seeking NOC to appear in the said entrance exam. The applicants appeared in the written test held on 22.09.2022. On the same date i.e. 22.09.2022, they were declared passed in written examination and provisionally selected for admission to M.Sc. Nursing Course under Government quota vide combined provisional result list (Annexure A-7). Since the first counselling for admission to M.Sc. Nursing Course-2022 was scheduled to be held on 04.10.2022, the applicants submitted reminder dated 30.09.2022 (Annexure A-8) to Respondent No. 2 requesting for grant of NOC for permission to attend counselling and to deposit fees to pursue M.Sc. Nursing Course. Since no communication was issued by respondent No. 1 i.e. PGIMER granting permission to the applicants to attend counselling on 04.10.2022 for admission to M.Sc. Nursing Course as such they could not attend 4- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 the said counselling. The BFUHS again issued admission notice (Annexure A-9) seeking fresh applications for walk in counselling for admission to M.Sc. Nursing Course-2022 in all University Constituent/Private Colleges in Punjab to be held on 14.10.2022. Pursuant to said admission notice, the applicants personally approached the respondents requesting for grant of NOC. The Respondent No. 1, vide impugned order dated 13.10.2022 granted NOC for applying in M.Sc. Nursing Course in BFUHS (Faridkot) to 19 candidates including the applicants. However, the said communication stipulated the following conditions:-
"(i) This NOC is valid only for Baba Farid University of Health Sciences in Main Campus only.
(ii) If selected, you will be relieved as per vacancy position and Institute requirement at the time of final admission for the above course. There are only 8 candidates can be relieved to pursue higher education in M.Sc. Nursing including NINE PGIMER. The priority-1 will be given to candidates selected in PGIMER.
Presently, 6 candidates have already been relieved to join/pursue M.Sc. (Nursing) Course at PGIMER, Chandigarh. This NOC is issued for remaining 2 seats out of 8. As of now, the criteria to relieve candidates for these vacant posts will be taken as "Seniority" in the service and not individual merit.
(iii) You will be relieved to join course only after reviewing Covid-19 situation prevailing in the country at the time of relieving.
(iv) NOC does not provide you any automatic or absolute right to be relieved for above course. The decision of the Competent Authority would be final and binding upon you.
(v) NOC is issued only for appearing in the specific examination and candidate may not claim NOC as a right to relieve her for course and will be relieved according to prevailing staff strength at the time of relieving.
(vi) You will submit necessary bond and other documents, if relieved."
5. The applicants have challenged the office order dated 13.10.2022 to the extent, it incorporates conditions primarily on the ground that restricting validity of NOC for BFUHS Main Campus only is totally in contravention of statutory notification dated 09.09.2020 issued by the Government of Punjab, Department 5- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 of Health Education and Research, whereby the Hon‟ble Governor of Punjab had authorized BFHUS to conduct entrance test for 2020 and onwards for selection of candidates for admission to M.Sc. Nursing Course in various institutions in the State of Punjab and it has specifically mentioned that this notification covers all institutions affiliated with BFHUS/Indian Nursing Counsel (INC)/Punjab Nursing Registration Counsel (PNRC), whether Government/Private/aided/unaided.
6. It has further been averred that the decision/criteria to relieve candidates for admission on the basis of "Seniority" in the service and not individual merit is also illogical and without any rational basis as any employee senior in seniority may not be able to seek admission in any particular University/College and at the same time may get admission in another University/College during different calendar months/schedule of admission. Thus, relieving employees/candidates junior in seniority during early admission process in one university/college can take away the right of another candidate senior in seniority, who may get admission in subsequent months of admission scheduled in another University. Moreover, fixing of priority for candidates selected in Nursing Institute (NINE) in PGIMER only also violates the fundamental right of equality among equals as in-service candidates cannot be discriminated in seeking admission among various Universities/Institutes/Colleges. Thus, the stipulation of issuing NOC for only two seats out of 8 is totally illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable.
7. The respondents filed written statement stating therein, that all the representations received from the applicants seeking NOC were put to the Competent Authority for consideration and were kept in abeyance till 03.10.2022. In this regard an agenda was placed before the Education Committee for framing the guidelines for deciding the requests of applicants and a meeting was held on 03.10.2022, wherein the agenda item was discussed and deliberated upon and ultimately it was deferred for further consideration. Upon repeated requests from the applicants, the Competent Authority granted NOC 6- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 for M.Sc. Nursing in University Campus of Baba Farid University, Faridkot and Rajasthan University of Health Science, Jaipur vide order dated 13.10.2022.
8. It has further been submitted that a meeting was held on 29.01.2022 under the Chairmanship of Prof. Ashok Kumar, Additional Medical Superintendent, Department of Hospital Administration to frame a policy to determine the number of employees in Nursing Cadre, who can be relieved in a particular year to pursue Higher Education Qualification i.e. M. Sc. Nursing (as in service candidate) without jeopardizing the working of the Institute. In the said meeting, it was also decided that the NOC can only be granted to the employees only if their applications are received well in advance before the last date of submission of application for the course for which NOC has been sought. It was further decided that the nursing officials, who get selected for higher studies at PGIMER Chandigarh (NINE), AIIMS New Delhi, NIHMANS Bangalore, RAK College of Nursing New Delhi or any Institute of National Importance will only be allowed study leave. The agenda with these observations was put up before the Education Committee in meeting held on 03.10.2022 under the Chairmanship of Prof. R. Sehgal, Dean (Academic). After discussion on agenda items, it was observed that the candidates opting for higher studies in the Institutes at par with PGIMER like AIIMS, NIMHANS and RAK College is logical, but for medical colleges like Baba Farid University is not understandable. It was also observed that the candidates, who wish to pursue higher studies should opt for better institutes, but not for medical colleges having recognition lesser than ours. It has been further submitted that the conditions in the NOC are clearly imposed for smooth functioning of the Institute and the same are within the power and prerogative of the employer i.e. respondent Institute. Further, the reasons for imposing a condition, that the applicants must apply to the main campus of Baba Farid Medical College, is because the applicants are gaining quality experience and knowledge by working with the respondent Institute. In order to maintain the quality and standard of experience, the rationale behind insisting 7- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 for education from main campus is that, the main campus may still have the infrastructure and amenities and quality education, which may be lacking in the affiliated institutions. With regard to notification dated 09.09.2020 issued by Government of Punjab, Department of Health Education, relied upon by the applicants, it has been submitted that the said notification is not applicable to the employees of the PGIMER, Chandigarh since the respondent Institute is an autonomous body and all the employees of the Institute are governed by the "Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, Rules 1967". It has also been submitted that the Institute is not denying study leave to the applicants, but due to shortage of Nursing Staff and heavy rush of patients, certain conditions were imposed, while granting NOC since it is not possible to allow all the candidates to avail study leave in order to ensure smooth functioning of patient care services. Therefore, in order to streamline the process of NOC and subsequent study leave, only 8 in service candidates are allowed to pursue higher education (M.Sc.). Out of these 8 seats, 6 seats are sanctioned for those, who pursue M.Sc. from PGIMR(NINE). The selection is made strictly in order of merit of the candidates in the respective merit lists of entrance test. Further, only 2 seats are left for those candidates, who are desirous to pursue M.Sc. Nursing from other colleges apart from PGIMER (NINE) and the criteria for allowing leave is as per seniority. The learned counsel for the applicant during the course of proceedings, submitted that the matter is squarely covered by an order passed by this Tribunal in the case of Dinesh Lawat Vs. Health Secretary, Chandigarh Administration and Another (O.A. No. 060/1454/2021). Confronted with this, Ms. Sukhmani Patwalia, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicants in this case were granted the No Objection Certificate with a condition that in case they get the admissions in the Institutions of National importance, only then they will be allowed the benefit of study leave, therefore, the judgment rendered in the case of Dinesh Lawat (supra) will not apply in the case in hand. On the point of Institute of National Importance, this Tribunal has called for affidavit stating 8- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 therein about the names of Institutes of National Importance and the criteria on the basis of which the respondents have arrived at the conclusion that the BFUHS and its affiliated colleges are not of National Importance.
9. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Tribunal on 15.12.2022, the Medical Superintendent, PGIMER, Chandigarh filed short affidavit dated 20.12.2022, on record stating therein that the reason for imposing a condition in the NOC is that, the applicants must apply to main campus of BFUHS because the applicants are currently gaining quality experience and knowledge by working with the respondent Institute and the rationale behind insisting for education from the main campus is that the main campus may still have the infrastructure and amenities and quality education, which may be lacking in the affiliated institutions. These conditions in the NOC are clearly imposed keeping in view the best interest of the patients, being in the larger public interest and also for smooth functioning of the Institute and the same are within the power and prerogative of the employer i.e. respondent Institute. It has further been stated that for the purpose of grant of NOC and subsequent study leave, the following institutes can be categorized as Institute of National importance :
PGIMER Chandigarh (NINE), AIIMS New Delhi, NIHMANS Bangalore, JIPMER Pondicherry and AIIMS like Institute such as AIIMS Rishikesh, AIIMS Jodhpur etc. It has been submitted that the Central Government grants the status of „Institute of National Importance‟ to premier higher educational institutions in India through an act of the Parliament and such Institutes get special funding and recognition from the Government of India. Further it has been submitted that due to shortage of Nursing Staff and heavy rush of patients, the above- mentioned conditions were imposed, in granting NOC, since it is not possible to allow study leave to all the candidates. It has also been averred that Study Leave is a matter of discretion of the employer as per Rule 50 of the Fundamental Rules and Supplementary Rule, Part III of the Central Civil Service Leave Rules 1972. The applicants cannot claim leave of any kind as a matter of 9- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 right. The answering respondents have full right to sanction or refuse leave in the exigency of services particularly on the ground of shortage of staff.
10. No rejoinder has been filed by the applicants.
11. Heard learned counsel for both the parties
12. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that when the Hon‟ble Governor of Punjab, by way of notification dated 09.09.2020 granted sanction for selection of candidates for admission to M.Sc. Nursing in various institutions in the State of Punjab including Government/Private/aided/unaided affiliated with BFHUS, then the respondents has no power and authority under the law to restrict the validity of NOC only for BFUHS main campus and not to other affiliated institutes. It was argued that Nursing Cadre in the entire PGIMER has a sanctioned strength of about 2500-2600 nursing personnel and decision to relieve only 8 candidates to pursue higher education is illegal, arbitrary and without any logic. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohini Jain Vs. State of Karnataka and Unni Krishan Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, holding that the education is now a fundamental right of the people of India. Learned counsel has also relied upon a decision dated 09.02.2022 rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Dinesh Lawat Vs. Health Secretary Chandigarh Administration and Another (O.A. No. 060/1454/2021).
13. The learned counsel for the respondents argued on the lines of submissions made in the written statement. Reliance has been placed on the following judgments.
(i) Anita Malik Vs. A.I.I.M.S. & Another 2006 (16) SCT 128
(ii) Babita Sahoo Vs. All India Institute of Medical Science through its Director Ansari Nagar New Delhi and Others, (OA NO.2868/2017 decided on 11.01.2018 by C.A.T Principal Bench New Delhi.
10- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022
(iii) Om Parkash Bairwa Vs. Union of India and Others (OA No. 3798/2017 decided on 19.04.2018 by C.A.T. Principal Bench New Delhi.
(iv) Asha Rani Vs. Union of India through Secretary and Others, (WP(C) No. 3895/2020 decided on 24.02.2021 by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court.
(v) Dr. Rohit Kumar Vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor and Others(Civil appeal No. 2739 of 2021 decided on 15.07.2021)
14. I have gone through the pleadings, perused records and considered the arguments of learned counsels..
15. The facts in the case of Dinesh Lawat (supra) relied upon by the applicants, is slightly different from the facts of the case in hand. In the matter of Dinesh Lawat, the respondents after granting NOC to the applicants therein rejected the study leave on the ground that such permission can be granted for the courses imparted by the Government Institutions only, whereas in the instant matter, the respondents have granted NOC with certain stipulations/conditions, which are under challenge before this Tribunal. It is a admitted fact that the applicants herein have not applied for study leave so far, as firstly they are aggrieved with the conditions imposed by the respondents in granting NOC..
16. The facts in the case of Anita Malik (supra), relied upon by the respondents, are distinguishable from the facts of the present case. In the case of Anita Malik, the request of the applicant for conversion of extra ordinary leave without pay into study leave with full pay and allowances was declined. The challenge by the applicant therein to denial of conversion of study leave was made after having accepted extra ordinary leave without pay and there after completion of her Post Certificate Course. In the judgment, the Hon‟ble High Court has also observed as under:-
"It is trite law that the Court sitting in judicial review, (service matters not excepting) does not sit in appeal over the wisdom of the executive's decisions or policies. It is concerned with the legality, procedural 11- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 propriety or reasonableness (in the Wednesbry sense) of the order complained against. I am not persuaded to hold that the reasons given by the AIIMS are in any manner arbitrary or unreasonable while declining the petitioner's request for conversion of the class of leave granted to her into study leave."
In terms of the aforesaid observation of the Hon‟ble High Court, this Tribunal has to see whether the conditions imposed by the respondents in granting NOC are reasonable and justified ?. The facts of this judgment are different from the facts in present case..
17. In the matters of Babita Sahoo (supra) and Om Parkash Bairwa (supra), the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench New Delhi has dismissed the Original Applications considering the fact that the respondents therein had rejected the request of the applicants for grant of study leave as per the prevalent policy adopted by the respondents. In the case of Asha Rani (supra) also, the rejection of the leave was in consonance with the policy framed by the respondents ESIC for all. The Hon‟ble High Court has held that, "
We are unable to agree. The relevant rule qua study leave in the CCS Rules is Rule 50(3) supra and which lays down the parameters. If RML Hospital and Safdarjung Hospital, as per their requirement, have made a policy for grant of study leave, it is not essential that the ESIC hospitals should also adopt the same policy. Section 17 or Rule 50(3) nowhere provides so and once the decision on the application of the petitioner for study leave is in consonance with the policy framed by respondents ESIC for all, and no case of discrimination is made out, it is not for the court to interfere. In the instant matter, under the Chairmanship of Professor Ashok Kumar, Additional Medical Superintendent, Department of Hospital Administration a meeting was held on 29.01.2022 to frame a policy to determine the number of employees in Nursing Cadre, who can be relieved in a particular year to pursue Higher Education qualification i.e. M.Sc.(Nursing). Admittedly, no such policy has been finalised by the respondents so far. Therefore, the respondents cannot take the advantage of these judgments.
12- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022
18. In the case of Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has disposed of the appeal of the appellant and observed as under:-
"41. In this case, there has not been any lapse on the part of the appellant. The appellant could not join the post graduate course in PGI Chandigarh for the January 2021 session for reasons attributable to the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 though technically, the said respondents cannot be said to have acted illegally or in breach of rules and regulations, in denying the Appellant Study Leave, in apprehension of rise in COVID-19 cases and the exigency of availability of doctors in full strength, as far as possible.
42. xxxxxxxxxxx
43. Since the seat in the Post Graduate Course in PGI Chandigarh which remained unfilled due to the inability of the Appellant to join has been carried over to the July 2021 which is yet to commence, and re- advertised, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the PGI, Chandigarh, being the Respondent No. 3 to admit the Appellant to the post graduate course scheduled to commence in July 2021, on the basis of INICET 2020, which he has successfully cleared. The Respondent No. 1 shall re- consider the application of the Appellant for Study Leave, taking into consideration the decline in COVID-19 cases in NCT of Delhi, and take a reasonable decision in favour of the Appellant. Unless there is a substantial rise in COVID-19 cases, the leave application of the Appellant shall not be declined."
Therefore, the facts in the case of Dr. Rohit Kumar are distinguishable from the facts of the present case.
19. Learned counsel for the respondents has argued that Institute is not denying study leave to the applicants, but due to shortage of Nursing Staff and heavy rush of patients, certain conditions were imposed while granting NOC. The reasoning for imposing such conditions was that the respondents considered that the applicants must apply to the Main Campus of BFUHS. This Tribunal is of the view that the said condition imposed by the respondents is neither reasonable nor justified as the applicants firstly applied for admission to the course of M.Sc. (Nursing) pursuant to advertisement notice issued by the BFUHS only and after having successful in the entrance examination, the University has allotted affiliated Institutions to the applicants to pursue M.Sc. course. The respondents cannot restrict or supplement the choice of applicants to get admission for higher course from the institution of their choice. The respondents 13- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 have not provided any data or details about the shortage of nursing staff to substantiate their arguments.
20. It has also been submitted by the respondents that the rationale behind insisting for education from the Main Campus is that the Main Campus may still have the infrastructure, amenities and quality education, which may be lacking in the affiliated institutions. In the absence of any substantive material, the opinion of the respondents about the standard of BFUHS is unreasonable and unjustified as from the prospectus of BFUHS, it is evident that the University has been recognized by Medical Council of India vide letter No. V/11015/3/200- ME(UG) dated 9th June, 2000. The UGC has also included the University in the list of recognized universities maintained by the University Grants Commission, under Section 2(1) of the UGC Act, 1956 vide letter no. F.9.3/97 (CPP-I) dated 4 July, 2002. The Regional Director, World Health Organization, Regional Office for South East Asia, World Health House, New Delhi has also forwarded the name of the University for inclusion in the World Directory of Medical Schools vide letter No. M12/6212 dated 6 May 2002. The University is also included in the list of Commonwealth Universities and their yearbook 2001 at page no. 692 (vol.I). At present, the University is having 155 affiliated colleges comprising 146 affiliated and 09 constituent colleges. The respondents has not produced any list of Universities of National Importance issued by the Union of India to support their argument . Therefore, in view of the background of the BFUHS, the conclusion of the respondents about the standard of BFUHS University is without any basis .
21. It is seen that in the meeting held on 29.01.2022 under the Chairmanship of Professor Ashok Kumar, it was also decided that NOC can only be granted to the employees, only if the applications are received well in advance before the last date of submission of application for the course, for which NOC has been sought. In the said meeting, there was no deliberation about the number of restricted candidates, to whom NOC can be granted. The applicants herein had 14- O.A. No. 1095/2022 and 1137/2022 applied for NOC on 08.09.2022 and 14.09.2022 prior to the last date of submission of online applications i.e. 19.09.2022. Not only this, the applicants have submitted reminder and requested to respondents to issue NOC to attend counselling for admission held on 04.10.2022 and further held on 14.10.2022. The applicants could be able to attend the counselling held on 30.10.2022 after an order dated 18.10.2022 issued by this Tribunal directing the respondents to allow the applicants for appearance in counselling held on 30.10.2022.
22. In the case of Mohini Jain (supra), the Hon‟ble Court has held that right to education is implicit in the Right to Life and Personal Liberty granted by Article 21 and must be interpreted in the light of the Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Articles 41, 45 and 46.
23., Accordingly, both the Original Applications are allowed. The conditions/stipulations No. I, II, IV and V imposed in office order dated 13.10.2022 granting NOC to the applicants are set aside being unreasonable and without any policy on the subject. The respondents are directed to consider the applicants‟ case for grant of study leave under the provisions of Study Leave Rules 1972 and relieve them to pursue their higher studies.
(SURESH KUMAR BATRA) MEMBER (J) „mw‟