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 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Dr. Anupam Hazra vs Union Of India & Ors on 25 June, 2018

Author: Arindam Sinha

Bench: Arindam Sinha

                                              1


        25.06.18
09
suman
Ct.4

                                       W.P. 14179 (W) of 2017


                                         Dr. Anupam Hazra
                                              Versus
                                        Union of India & Ors.

                       Dr. Anupam Hazra
                                         ....petitioner (in person)
                       Mr. Subrata Roy Karmakar
                                   ...for the Visva Bharati University
                       Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta
                                   ...for UGC


                       Record of submissions and observations in order

                   dated 11th June, 2018 are reproduced below as necessary

                   for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition.

                         "Petitioner appears in person. He demonstrates facts

                   to be as follows:

                       By order dated 7th June, 2014 he was granted extra

                   ordinary leave (without pay) for a period of one year up to 1st

                   June, 2015. By office order dated 12th May, 2015 the

                   University conveyed that said leave is going to expire on 1st

                   June, 2015 and petitioner is expected to get a clearance

                   from Lok Sabha Secretariat and rejoin duty on or before 1st

                   June, 2015 failing which he will be deemed to have reverted

                   back to his parent organization, Assam University Silchar.

                   On 26th May, 2015 petitioner, as appears from disclosure at
                           2

page 58 of the writ petition, sought to resume duty. By

writing dated 28th May, 2015 of Head, Department of Social

work of the University, inter alia, following was said:

           "In accordance with the above mentioned Office
           Orders the application does not satisfy the
           required conditions. The Department does not take
           cognizance of your application and cannot permit
           you to resume duties."

Subsequently by another writing dated 2nd June, 2015 the

next incumbent to the office of Head, Department of Social

Work of the University stated as follows:

           "With reference to your above letter this is to
           inform you that Dr. Anupam Hazra, Assistant
           Professor, has not reported to the undersigned till
           today i.e. 2nd June, 2015.
           This is for your information and record."


On 13th August, 2015 Joint Department on Offices of Profit

(Sixteenth Lok Sabha) Fourth Report was presented from

which the following is extracted below:

           "Therefore, Dr. Anupam Hazra can hold both the
           offices of Member of Parliament and that of
           Assistant     Professor  at    the    Visva-Bharati
           University, as under Article 102(1)(a), the office of
           Assistant Professor does not qualify as an office of
           profit under the Government.

           Further, it is held by the Joint Committee on
           Offices of Profit that since the office of Assistant
           Professor at the Visva-bharati University is not an
           office under the Central Government in the
           absence of vital requirements, the University may
           resolve the matter on its own in light of the
           specified service requirements.

           In doing so, the Committee recommends that the
           directions of the UGC Circular dated 10th
           September, 1974 and 06 March, 1987 and the
           circulars issued from time to time regulating the
                            3

             service conditions of teachers be strictly followed
             by the University."

    Mr. Gupta, learned advocate appears on behalf of

University    Grants    Commission     and   files   affidavit-in-

opposition. He refers to circular letter dated 10th September,

2014 issued by his client to Vice Chancellor of Universities.

It would be sufficient to extract the following from the said

letter.

             "The University Grants Commission had referred
             this question earlier for advice to its Advisory
             Committee      of    Vice-Chancellors   and     the
             Commission after considering the advice of the
             Committee of Vice-Chancellors had expressed the
             view that "the teachers who are either elected or
             nominated to the Parliament/State Legislature
             may not be required to resign their academic
             position or to take long leave during the tenure of
             their membership. In order that the teaching work
             may not suffer, the University may consider
             prescribing the minimum number of days that
             such teachers should be available for their
             academic teaching and research work in the
             University. Such teachers should not hold any
             administrative position/responsibilities in the
             University or College during the period they are
             members of parliament/Legislature."

    It appears petitioner wants to resume working with the

University. He had filed this writ petition in June, 2017 and

has been prosecuting the same. University will consider

whether it sought to jump the gun. Reason attributed for not

allowing petitioner to join may have been good reason as on

May- June, 2015 but on or after 13th August, 2015 such

reason stood obliterated."

    Mr. Roy Karmakar submits, petitioner joined as a
                           4

probationer. In prescribed period of probation of one year

petitioner did not serve any time beyond four months. That

period not having been extended, has expired. He is

opposing order directing petitioner to be allowed to resume

as probationer. Dr. Hazra disputes the submission that he

was on probation.    According to him, he is confirmed in

service.

    Petitioner had challenged Memo dated 2nd June, 2015

and impugned notification dated 16th February, 2015.

Impugned notification states, inter alia, petitioner was

requested to submit a clearance from Lok Sabha Secretariat

to the effect that he could simultaneously function as

Hon'ble Member of Parliament and Assistant Professor,

Department of Social Work, Visva Bharati. In that view, all

concerned were requested not to entertain petitioner in

department or assign any teaching load to him during his

Lok Sabha membership.

    Relevant text of the impugned office order dated 2nd

June, 2015 is extracted below:

    "However, Dr. Anupam Hazra, has failed to join his duties

in the Department of Social Work till 2nd June, 2015 after

expiry of Extra-Ordinary-Leave (EOL).

    In view of the above, undersigned is directed to convey

that:

    1.

Dr. Anupam Hazra, Assistant Professor, 5 Department of Social Work, who is on lien from Assam University, Silchar is presumed to have reverted himself back to his parent organization.

1. Name of Dr. Anupam Hazra, Assistant Professor, Department of Social Work will cease to be borne on the roll of Establishment of Visva-Bharati with immediate effect.""

Based on materials recorded in order dated 11th June, 2018 I am of the view petitioner cannot be prevented from resuming his service, as probationer, if that is his position. At the time he was resisted from resuming work in Visva Bharati, his probationary service, as contended by the University, appears to have been subsisting. This, in spite of submissions made on behalf of Visva Bharati that no extension was granted. Whether petitioner is to be granted extension of alleged probation, to carry out remainder of the year of alleged probationary service is for the University to decide but at this time it cannot prevent him from resuming his service. There will be direction accordingly. The University is directed to allow petitioner to resume his service since the only ground of resistance being whether he could be both a Member of Parliament as well as serve in the University has been answered in the fourth report of Joint Committee on Offices of Profit which was presented to 6 Lok Sabha on 13th August, 2015. Petitioner will obtain copy of this order and present himself for resuming his service within three weeks from date.
Writ petition is disposed of.
Mr. Roy Karmakar prays for stay of operation of this order. Prayer is considered and rejected.
(Arindam Sinha, J. )