Dr.(Brig) S.S. Anand vs Jamia Hamdard University & Ors on 14 May, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Dr.(Brig) S.S. Anand vs Jamia Hamdard University & Ors on 14 May, 2020

Bench: Mukta Gupta

$~13
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P. (C) 3137/2020
       DR.(BRIG) S.S. ANAND                                          .....Petitioner
                           Represented by:             Mr.Ajay Dabas, Mr. Ravi
                                                       Dagar and Ms.Priyanka Dagar,
                                                       Advocates.
                                  versus
       JAMIA HAMDARD UNIVERSITY & ORS.                   .....Respondents
                         Represented by: Mr.Shobhan, Advocate for
                                         respondent No.1.
                                         Mr.Saket Sikri, Advocate for
                                         respondent No.2.
                                         Mr.Apoorv Kurup and
                                         Ms.Nidhi Mittal, Advocates for
                                         respondent No.3/UGC.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

                                 ORDER

% 14.05.2020 The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

CM APPL. 10903/2020

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CM APPL.10904/2020 (exemption from filing court fee) CM APPL.10905/2020 (exemption from filing attested affidavits)

1. By this application, petitioner seeks exemption from filing the attested affidavits and court fees.

2. Exemption is allowed, subject to the condition that petitioner will file the duly sworn/attested affidavit and court fees within 72 hours from the date of resumption of the regular functioning of this Court.

3. Application is disposed of.

W.P. (C) 3137/2020 Page 1 of 3

W.P. (C) 3137/2020

1. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by respondent No.1, petitioner was appointed as a Professor, Radiology (Radio-diagnosis) on 7th May, 2012. Thereafter the petitioner besides working as Professor Radiology has also acted as a Dean and Medical Superintendent of respondent No.2 institute.

2. Grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that he received an email dated 1st May, 2020 terminating his services without any show cause notice or any reason being assigned to him.

3. The petitioner has impleaded Jamia Hamdard University through its Vice Chancellor as respondent No.1, Hamdard Institute of Medical Science & Research through its Director General as respondent No.2 and University Grants Commission as respondent No.3.

4. Though respondent No.1 supports the stand of the petitioner and states that the termination is illegal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 appears and states that university and the institute besides other organizations were being run by Hamdard National Foundation as the sponsoring body. Now there is a bifurcation in the said national body by way of a family settlement resulting in the assets of the Foundation being distributed. As per the said settlement which is presently being acted upon Jamia Hamdard University comes to the share of one party whereas Hamdard Institute of Medical Science & Research comes to the other party.

5. On a query raised by this Court as to with which university respondent No.2 is affiliated, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 fairly admits that as on today respondent No.2 institute is affiliated to respondent No.1 university even though the process of bifurcation is on. Thus admittedly at the moment respondent No.2 is governed by the rules and regulations of respondent No.1. Further the petitioner was appointed as a Professor pursuant to an advertisement issued by respondent No.1 on the terms and conditions as prescribed by respondent No.1.

W.P. (C) 3137/2020 Page 2 of 3

6. This Court prima facie finds that the order of termination of the services of the petitioner is per-se illegal as no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor any reason has been assigned in the termination letter sent through an email. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 states that instead of passing any ex-parte order at this stage, the petitioner be adjourned for a few days so that learned counsel can see if there can be any resolution in the matter.

7. At request of learned counsel for respondent No.2, list on 20th May, 2020.

8. In the meantime, affidavits, if any, be filed by respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

MAY 14, 2020 'vn' W.P. (C) 3137/2020 Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders