Withdrawal of pension for involvement in MBBS scam
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Apr 30: High Court has turned down the plea of former Chairman of Board of Professional Entrance Examination (BOPEE) Mushtaq Ahmed Peer challenging the order of University of Kashmir whereby his monthly pension has been withdrawn in terms of Article 168 of the J&K Civil Service Regulations for his involvement in the MBBS scam and conviction by the Anti-Corruption Court Kashmir.
While dismissing the petition, Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, “the petitioner cannot claim that since appeal against his conviction is pending adjudication before the High Court, as such, he be not treated as a person convicted for the purposes of applying the provisions of Article 168 of J&K CSR”.
“The plea of the petitioner that he was not provided a prior opportunity of being heard is not tenable in law. This is so because had the petitioner been given an opportunity of being heard, the position would not have changed. The petitioner could not have, by any stretch of reasoning, demonstrated before the respondent-University that the offences for which he has been convicted are not serious or do not constitute grave misconduct”, High Court said.
“Therefore, issuance of notice of hearing to the petitioner before passing of the order impugned, in the given facts and circumstances would have been a useless formality. The legal position in this regard is well settled. The Supreme Court has held that principles of natural justice in particular principle of audi alteram partem is not a straightjacket rule having universal application. There may be situations where it is felt that a fair hearing would make no difference—meaning that hearing would not change the ultimate conclusion reached by decision maker”, Justice Kumar said.
High Court further observed, “in the case in hand neither conviction nor sentence awarded to the petitioner is stayed and, therefore, for the purposes of Rule 168 CSR, the petitioner is a convict and continues to be so till exonerated by the appellate court by reversing the judgment of conviction”, adding “Rule 168 CSR shall, therefore, operate and there is, thus, no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. Consequently, the order impugned is upheld and the writ petition along with connected application is dismissed”.
Follow our WhatsApp channel