Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Dec 9: High Court has declined to stay the order of termination of a scientist working at Kashmir University accused of being involved in activity prejudicial to the interest of the state.
Muheet Ahmad Butt was working as Scientist-D in the Department of Computer Sciences of the Varsity when he was terminated from service by the Secretary General Administration Department on 13.8.2022 by order of the Lieutenant Governor under and in terms of Article 311 (2) (c) Constitution of India and challenged the same in the instant petition.
Advocate Solih Pirzada appearing for Butt contended that the impugned order has been issued without any competence and jurisdiction by the Secretary GAD, in that, the University of Kashmir is an autonomous body wherein the service conditions of its employees and teachers are governed by the provisions of Kashmir University Act 1969 and that the provisions of Article 311 (2) (c) have been invoked by the GAD without drawing objective satisfaction inasmuch as arbitrarily and in breach and violation of legal, statutory, fundamental rights of the petitioner.
Court recorded that an order of dismissal, removal, reduction in rank, termination, compulsory retirement or reversion of a public servant cannot be stayed at an interim stage as it would result in wrong usurpation of the office by the employee during the operation of the interim order if later on such order of dismissal, removal, reduction in rank, termination, compulsory retirement or reversion, is upheld at the final stage, as the said act becomes irreversible and the employer cannot suitably be compensated by moulding the relief at the final stage.
Court, however, said that in extreme and rare cases where the order is prima facie on the face of it mala fide or bad in law, then the court may grant such an interim relief at the interim stage. “However, in such a case there must be the availability of a very strong prima facie case of a standard much higher than just a prima facie case and the considerations of balance of convenience and irreparable injury forcefully tilting the balance of the case totally in favour of the applicant. Thus the sine qua non for grant of such an interim relief at an interim stage has to be that the case must be a rare and exceptional one”, Court clarified.
Court after perusal of the application for interim relief said the same reveals that the petitioner has not averred either in the writ petition or in the application that he has a very strong prima facie case or else that withholding of an interim relief would cause an irreparable injury to him.
“Thus, in view of this, the interim relief seeking staying of the impugned termination order by the petitioner in the application for interim relief, which in essence would have colour and texture of grant of final relief, cannot be granted at this stage in favour of the petitioner as the case of the petitioner is not found to be a rare and exceptional one warranting grant of an interim relief by way of staying the operation of the impugned dismissal order at this stage”, reads the order.
Follow our WhatsApp channel