Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Feb 1: High Court today held that Director SKIMS is not competent to award major punishment of dismissal from services to the employee holding the post of Professor in the Institute and quashed the order of termination of a Doctor citing the Government is competent to take such decision.
Dr. B A Wani Professor Department of Cardiology was removed vide order passed in the year 1993 issued by the then Director of the Institute for his unauthorized absences from his services.
He questioned his termination and Justice Sanjeev Kumar has held that the Government is competent to take major punishment like termination, reduction in rank etc from service can be imposed only by the Government and such powers cannot be delegated by the Government to any authority subordinate to it.
Justice Kumar agreed with the arguments of the Senior counsel R A Jan that the Director, SKIMS was not a competent authority to remove the petitioner-Wani who at the time of his termination was holding the post of Professor and head of the department of Cardiology in SKIMS.
“I am more inclined to accept this plea for the simple reason that to the specific averments made by the petitioner- Wani in respect of incompetence of the Director, SKIMS to issue the impugned order, there is no specific reply or rebuttal by the respondent-SKIMS”, Justice Kumar recorded.
“That in the disciplinary action that may be initiated by the competent authority, the petitioner shall be given adequate opportunity to defend himself strictly adhered to in such disciplinary proceedings, which shall be concluded within a period of two months from the date charges are served upon the petitioner”, reads the judgment.
Court has also made it clear that in case no such proceedings are envisaged or initiated against the petitioner, his application for voluntary retirement under Article 230 of the CSR shall be considered and appropriate orders passed within one month from the date of expiry of time stipulated herein above for conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings.
Court on the reply in opposition to the plea of the aggrieved Doctor said the Director of the Institute, has not made any attempt to explain his competence to impose penalty of removal from service of a gazetted officer.
“It is also not demonstrated by the respondent-SKIMS whether the status of the Professor and other faculty positions of SKIMS is that of a gazetted officer or not”, reads the judgment.
Justice Kumar, however, said that if this Court holds that the impugned order is traceable to Article 128 of the CSR, yet in the absence of specific delegation made by the Government to the Director, SKIMS, the impugned order would be without jurisdiction and competence of the Director.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
