Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7482 (UTT)

DR. RAKESH GIRI v. GURUKUL KANGRI UNIVERSITY

WPSB/115/2018 · 2025-08-12

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Subhash Upadhyay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:7083-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB/115/2018 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 1. Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the respondent - University. 3. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for the respondent-UGC. 4. According to petitioner, he was initially appointed as Yoga Therapist (Class III) in Education Department, Chandigarh Administration on 17.12.1977 and after serving for about five years, he was appointed to a Class- II post of State Yoga Organiser vide order dated 17.08.1982, in which capacity he served till 23.04.2003. 5. On 24.03.2003, he was appointed as Lecturer (Human Consciousness & Yogic Science) in Gurukul Kangri University, Haridwar in the pay scale of ₹8000-13500. In the said order, it was mentioned that fixation of pay shall be done as per Rules. 6. According to the petitioner, after his appointment in Gurukul Kangri University, he was relieved by Director, Public Instructions, Chandigarh Administration vide order dated 10.04.2003 in which it was provided that he shall hold lien in the Department for a period of two years from the date of his relieving. According to the petitioner, 2025:UHC:7083-DB the post of State Yoga Organiser was carrying the pay scale of ₹7000-10980, and as per the last pay certificate, issued by Chandigarh Administration, his last pay drawn was ₹9750 and accordingly, his pay on the post of Lecturer was fixed, by the Competent Authority in Gurukul Kangri University, in the appropriate level vide order dated 08.02.2006 and petitioner thereafter submitted technical resignation from the post of State Yoga Organiser on 24.02.2006. 7. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned recommendation dated 27.09.2017 made by the respondent no. 3 (contained as Annexure no. 24 to this writ petition) and recommendations dated 06.12.2017 made by the respondent no. 4 to recover Rs. 15,71,016/- (from 24.4.2003 to 31.12.2017), which is to be recovered by adjusting promotional pay arrear of Rs. 2,44,684/- for the period (from 24.04.2015 to 31.12.2017 and Rs. 13,26,826/- from the month January, 2018 in 36 equal instalments @ Rs. 36,826/- p.m. and also made it a condition that the arrears which is to be paid to the petitioner as per 7th pay commission, the same may shall be adjusted against the recovery amount (contained as Annexure No. 26 to this writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned letter/order dated 12.01.2018 passed by the respondent no. 2 (contained as Annexure No. 28 to this writ petition) (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioner, on account of promotion as associate professor from 24.04.2015 to 31.12.2017 along with 18% interest, from the date of its due, till the date of its actual realization. (iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner 2025:UHC:7083-DB as fixed by the respondent no. 2 vide letter/order dated 08.02.2006 (contained as Annexure No. 12 to this writ petition) (v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 73,724/- deducted from the salary of the petitioner of the month of January, February, 2018, along with 18% interest till the date of its actual realization. (vi) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to produce the observations made by the Finance Officer, Gurukul Kangri University, Haridwar in the year 2015, in regard to the petitioner, as absorbed pensioner instead of re-employed pensioner, before this Hon’ble Court, as neither the respondent No. 2, nor the respondent no. 3 is supplying the same to the petitioner. 8. Petitioner is aggrieved by the communication dated 27.09.2017 issued by Under Secretary, University Grants Commission, whereby Registrar, Gurukul Kangri University was informed that since petitioner was not holding Group ‘A’ post before his appointment in Gurukul Kangri University, therefore, his pay would be fixed at minimum on his appointment as Lecturer w.e.f. 24.03.2003, by ignoring his pension, as per the existing Rules. 9. Dr. Supriya Dahiya, Education Officer, University Grants Commission has filed counter on behalf of respondent no. 3 stating that petitioner had lien on the post under Chandigarh Administration for a period of two years and his lien was terminated on 10.01.2006 and he was allowed to seek voluntary retirement w.e.f. 23.04.2003 from his previous employer, therefore, petitioner is no more pensioner before employment in the University to act as a reemployed pensioner and he did not 2025:UHC:7083-DB choose the pro-rate retirement benefits and did not get his service counted in the University for retirement benefits. 10. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the respondent-University points out that petitioner has made a representation to University Grants Commission on 02.11.2017, which is on record as Annexure No. 25 to the writ petition, therefore, University Grants Commission may be directed to examine the representation made by petitioner in the light of the applicable Regulations. 11. We find substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the respondent-University. Since petitioner has already approached the Competent Authority by making representation, therefore, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Competent Authority in University Grants Commission to consider petitioner’s representation dated 02.11.2017 and pass a reasoned order, as per law, within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 12.08.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa 85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3 D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.08.12 22:51:34 -07'00' 2025:UHC:7083-DB