High Court issues summons to Jammu University VC, Registrar

Jammu, Aug 13: Justice B.S.Walia of High Court has issued show cause notice to Prof RD Sharma, Vice- Chancellor and Prof Keshav Sharma, Registrar, University of Jammu on a contempt petition filed by Dr Gauri D. Bajju, Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry, University of Jammu for constituting Committees, taking legal opinion in utter disrespect and disregard of High Court orders.

Appearing for Dr Bajju, Jagjit Rai Advocate argued that she was not apprised by the Screening Committee in violations of clause 16:2 of UGC Regulations, 2010 and was not called for the interview. Feeling aggrieved of the situation she filed service writ petition being 71/2012 in which High Court vide order dated 17.01.2012 directed to hold the interview of the petitioner, as such was interviewed on 18.01.2012 as per directions of the High Court.

SWP 71/2012 was dismissed on technical grounds whereas the High Court clearly held that there is no dispute in regard to category-1 and II because the petitioner has secured 130 APIs (Academic Performance Indicators) against the 100 requisite APIs. The petitioner filed another writ petition being No. 1660/2015 in which the High Court directed vide order dated 18.09.2015 directed to count the API score of category-Ill within the same assessment period i.e. 01.01.2006 to 01.01.2009 as desired by the authorities.

The University authorities constituted Screening Committee to count API score of category-Ill as per directions of the Court. The petitioner scored 122 APIs against the requisite 100 APIs in category-Ill. Despite this, formal orders for the promotion were delayed in order to accommodate blue eyed persons at the risks and cost of the service career of the petitioner. The Vice Chancellor and the Registrar send the file to seek legal opinion from a senior Counsel of the University.

Two opinion dated 03.02.2016 and 18.02.2016 was rendered in favour of the petitioner in regard to the date of eligibility. Thus satisfied with the legal opinion sought from an independent senior Counsel some persons tampered with the records of University and did some manipulations in order to shield the some persons with vested interests.

During the pendency of the litigation Prof. S.K. Pandey became Head of the Department by superseding the petitioner despite being senior. Constrained and compelled by the circumstances another writ petition being No. 1301/2016 in which the High Court vide ordered 22.06.2016 directed the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar to pass formal orders of promotion to stage -5 with effect from 01.01.2009 because the petitioner has completed the requisite on re-evaluation within the same assessment period, as such it was an established mistake of the University authorities.

University Committee also recommended for conducting proceedings for professional misconduct against Pi of S.K. Pandey who impersonated himself as a sole author of 5th publication in which the petitioner was also a joint author. The petitioner had to knock the doors of High Court for her 5th publication in SWP 499/2012.

That order passed in SWP No. 1301/2016 dated 22.06.2016 which was duly served upon Vice Chancellor and the Registrar on 27.06.2015.

After receipt of the High Court order, both the authorities turned a deaf ear and constituted a Committee of seven members vide order dated 28.07.2016 in order to overreach the order passed in SWP 1301/2016.

After passing the order above mentioned neither Vice Chancellor or Registrar have no power and jurisdiction to constitute Committees and seek legal opinions in violations of orders passed by the High Court. The attitude of Vice Chancellor and Registrar is prima-facie contemptuous in nature because when High Court passed order in SWP 1301/2016 relying upon the legal opinion 03.02.2016 and 18.02.2016, the University authorities have to submit the file of the petitioner to the Chancellor for obtaining approval. But they intentionally tried to overreach the orders of the High Court seeking legal opinions un-necessarily. The High Court directed the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar to file the statement of facts. Aruna Thakur Advocate appeared for onbehalf of Vice Chancellor and the Registrar.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *