F HEAL HERS AND OTHERS HEALTH SCIENCES, ROHTAK s v. DR. DHARA B ANDI RA BALLABH DHAULAKHANDI
Case Details
LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) 219 Page 1 of 9 IN THE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB ARH CHANDIGARH NJAB AND HARYANA AT LPA-285-2020 (O&M) M) 2025 Date of Decision: 08.01.2025 PT. B.D. SHAR SHARMA, UNIVERSITY OF HEAL HERS AND OTHERS HEALTH SCIENCES, ROHTAK s . . . . Appellants Vs. DR. DHARA B ANDI RA BALLABH DHAULAKHANDI **** dent . . . . Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ CORAM: HO HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEE HO SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA **** Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal, Ad Present: M Mr. Ojas Bansal, Advoate M M Mr. Tejas Bansal, Advocate M Mr. Nissim Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellants. for al, Advocate with te with Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate with M dvocate Mr. Varun Veer Chauhan, Advoca M For the respondent. Fo Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G., H M .G., Haryana. SANJEEV PR ral) V PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) **** 1. This is is is an appeal preferred by the U rma, the University- PT. B.D. Sharma, Universi iversity of Health Sciences, Rohta ated Rohtak assailing the order dated 22.10.20 .10.2019 passed by the Single Judg tition e Judge whereby the writ petition preferred eferred by the respondent/writ p rit petitioner was allowed; the the responde pondents (therein) were directed to writ ed to consider the case of the writ petitione titioner as per Rules for promotion to ; tion to the post of Senior Professor; MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 2 of 9 and the d the exercise was directed to be d two o be done within a period of two months, nths, holding the Haryana Medical Ed ent) ical Education Service (Amendment) Rules, 20 les, 2007 (‘Rules of 2007’) to be appli essor e applicable for the post of Professor in the D the Department of Biotechnology a Post ogy and Molecular Medicine, Post Graduate aduate Institute of Medical Sciences, R nces, Rohtak. 2. The case e case set up by the petitioner before at he before the Single Judge was that he was app s appointed as a lecturer on contra and contract basis on 22.09.2006 and continue ntinued up to 24.01.2007, whereafter stant eafter he was appointed as Assistant Professo ofessor on contract basis from time to d on time to time, and was appointed on regular b ular basis on 28.01.2009 and continue up to ontinued as Assistant Professor up to 28.01.20 .01.2013, and was re-designated/prom essor ed/promoted as Associate Professor with effe th effect from 29.01.2013, in the Dep and e Department of Biotechnology and Molecula olecular Medicine. 3. He has fu has further prayed in his petition to s y his n to set aside the order, whereby his claim fo im for promotion as Senior Profe the Professor and a direction to the responde pondents to promote him as Senio from Senior Professor with effect from 29.01.20 .01.2017 along with all consequential b ential benefits has been ignored. 4. Learned earned counsel for the petitioner has had er has stated that the petitioner had earlier p rlier preferred a writ petition bef king n before this Court for seeking considera nsideration of his case for promotion,
Decision
ed of otion, and this Court had disposed of the writ p writ petition with directions to the res e his the respondents therein to decide his represent resentation wherein he has claime said claimed his promotion. The said direction ections were resulted in passing ated ssing of a speaking order dated MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 3 of 9 09.10.20 .10.2017 wherein the Dean, PGIM the PGIMS, Rohtak stated that the qualifica alifications and ience experience required for - re- designati signation/promotion/appointment to th enior t to the post of Professor and Senior Professo ofessor in the Department of Bi cular of Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine edicine, have not been approved by th d the by the Government as yet, and the Rules w les which have been approved by the d by the Government, require the petitione titioner’s case to be considered afre ciate d afresh for the post of Associate Professo ofessor. It has been stated that the re er as he re-designation of the petitioner as Associat sociate Professor has not been done ules done in accordance with the Rules which ha ich had been approved by the State Go tate Government. 5. The Sing e Single Judge has, after taking into ions, g into consideration the contentions, proceede oceeded to observe that as per Rule 9 dical ule 9(1)(e) of the Haryana Medical Educatio ucation Service (Amendment) Rules, ment Rules, 2007, method of recruitment on the po the post of Senior Professor is 75% by irect 5% by promotion and 25% by direct recruitme ruitment, and the qualifications ha the ons have been laid down in the Schedule hedule. 6. It has be has been stated that the petitioner acq ce in er acquired four years of service in speciality eciality as Associate Professor in 20 e for in 2017, and was thus eligible for promotio omotion. 7. The learn e learned Single Judge has also notice ment noticed clause 7 of the appointment letter wh ter which states that the services of the rned of the petitioner would be governed by Harya Haryana Medical Education Service dical ervice Rules, 1988/Haryana Medical Educatio ucation Service (Amendment) Rules, e to ules, 2007 as amended from time to MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 4 of 9 time. Th e. The contents of the decision of ticed n of 04.06.2008 were also noticed which re ich reflected that the Government osed nment has approved the proposed qualifica alification and experience for differen and ifferent posts in Biotechnology and Molecula olecular Medicine Departments, and pr and proceeded to hold as under: “once University had alread ready sought the approval of the Government in fixing the edu of e educational qualification and experience, in the year 2008, no an , no explanation has come forth in not introducing the Rules o for es or promulgation of new Rules, thus, in such circumstances Ru nces, the aforementioned Rules would be applicable. Petiti Ru etitioner concededly was redesignated as Associate Professor red ssor w.e.f 29.012013, after gaining ga four years of experienc rience in the speciality concerned. The co stand of the the respondents that aforementioned Department i.e. B afo . Biotechnology was not included in the definition 2(b) , there in therefore, non-applicability of the Rules, is not able to cut an i of an ice, for the reason that terms and conditions of the appoin ter pointment letter would be sacrosanct between the parties.” sa 8. Learned arned counsel appearing for the app ar as he appellant submits that so far as Rules of les of 2007 are concerned, the depa and e department of Biotechnology and Molecula olecular Medicine was not included i nical uded in the Rules, and only clinical departme partments as mentioned in Clause 2( arlier use 2(b) were included. The earlier Rules of les of Haryana Medical Education S es of on Service Rules, 1988 (‘Rules of 1988’) also did not include the non-clin ules. clinical departments in the Rules. He there therefore submits that the Rules of ould les of 1988 or Rules of 2007 would have no ve no application rn to govern and the promotion exercise and th qualifica alifications laid down for the depar and department of Biotechnology and MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 5 of 9 Molecula olecular Medicine, and therefore sepa t for re separate approval was sought for qualifica alification. 9. It is stat is stated that the State Government l for nment has only given approval for education ucational qualifications up to the pos nd he post of Associate Professor, and the qual qualifications for promotion to t enior to the post of Professor/Senior Professo ofessor have not been approved oved by ent. the State Government. Resultan sultantly, the petitioner could not be and ot be considered for promotion and the direc directions issued by the learned S the ned Single Judge for adopting the Rules of les of 2007 for consideration of case o otion case of the petitioner for promotion was erro s erroneous. It is his submission t nt is sion that the State Government is uired required to give approval for qua r qualifications for t of the post of Professo ofessor/Senior Professor whereafter th ill be fter the case of the petitioner will be considere nsidered for promotion, and the Singl iven Single Judge could not have given direction ections for directly adopting the Rule ment e Rules of 2007, as the department was not i s not included in the Rules. 10. The Stat he State Government was asked to fil filed to file its affidavit, and it has filed an affid affidavit wherein a stand has bee the as been taken that so far as the establish tablishment of Biotechnology and Mo ment nd Molecular Medicine Department is concer concerned, the same was done by the any by the University without taking any prior app ment. ior approval of the State Government. 11. It is furt is further stated that so far as the Rul 2007 he Rules of 1988 and Rules of 2007 are conc concerned, they are also applicab ts as pplicable on non-medical posts as MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 6 of 9 provided ovided in Appendix B of the Rules of 7. It ules of 1988 as amended in 2007. It reads as ds as under: “(v) It is further humbly su ly submitted that the said rules of 1988/2007 are also applicab ru licable on the non-medical posts as provided in the Appendi po endix B of the Haryana Medical Education Service Rules, M les, 1988 as amended in 2007 at serial no. 09. 13, 16 and 20 nd 19, the post of Senior Professor Pr (Non- Medical), Profe Professor (Non-Medical), Associate Professor (Non-Medical) As al) and Assitant Professor (Non-Medical) have been mentioned (N ned.” 12. The Stat he State Government has also taken a oved aken a stand that they had approved one post e post of Senior Professor in Depar vide epartment of Biotechnology vide memo da mo dated 03.06.2008, and the same c ation ame can be filled and re-designation can be do n be done on the post of Senior Profes s of Professor (Non-Medical) in terms of qualifica alifications and experience laid down es of down in Appendix B of the Rules of 1988/200 2007. 13. The aff he affidavit further proceeds to stat the o state that without informing the Governm vernment regarding establishment of logy of department of Biotechnology and Mol d Molecular Medicine and that the sa n the the same does not come within the MCI pur purview, the approval was given tions given in 2008 for the qualifications and posts d posts were also approved. The Unive d the niversity never communicated the Governm vernment regarding any objection ab e of tion about legality and existence of the depa department of Biotechnology an and gy and Molecular Medicine, and therefore refore, even if the Government sanct ules t sanctions the post, still these Rules shall be all be in contradiction with the MCI rsity e MCI guidelines as the University MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 7 of 9 itself has elf has stated that the department of cular nt of Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine edicine does not come within the purvi e purview of MCI. 14. It furthe further claims that it is only the rther the MCI which can give further sanction nction of department of Biotechnolog ne in hnology and Molecular Medicine in the Univ University. 15. We have e have given our careful consideration eration to the aforesaid submissions. 16. The peti he petitioner is claiming consideration st of eration for promotion to the post of Senior P nior Professor. Admittedly, no case of cted ase of promotion is being conducted by the U the University. So far as the questi f the question regarding approval of the qualifica alification of Professor as suggeste the ggested by the University to the Governm vernment is concerned, we are of f State e of firm view that once the State Governm vernment gets a requisition for a non ome a non-clinical post, they must come out with t with a clear stand whether the qual n the e qualifications as mentioned in the Rules of les of 2007 would apply to the depa and department of Biotechnology and Molecula olecular Medicine, and while they hav tions ey have approved the qualifications for Assis r Assistant Professor and Associate Pro take ate Professor, they ought to also take a decisio ecision with regard to the post of Prof f Professor and Senior Professor. 17. So far a far as the contention in the affidavit ove, fidavit is concerned as noted above, we find find that it is a case of the State Go pass ate Government in avoiding to pass specific ecific orders with regard to approval t hich roval to be given for the post which has been s been duly sanctioned by them for the logy for the department of Biotechnology and Mol d Molecular Medicine. It is a settled been ettled law that once a post has been sanctione nctioned by the State Government, t the ent, they must also lay down the MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 8 of 9 education ucational qualifications and experienc g up erience qualifications for filling up the said p said post. 18. So far far as the directions issued by th the by the Single Judge directing the Universi iversity to adopt a particular service r and rvice rule namely Rules of 2007 and the Appe Appendix thereto is concerned, we ar ccept , we are afraid that we cannot accept the said said directions to be in accordance nder dance with law, as the Court under Writ Rev rit Review jurisdiction, would not be e rsity ot be empowered to direct University to adopt adopt a particular rule. It is for th the for the State Government and the Universi iversity to take a decision in this regar s regard. 19. Howeve owever, we find that so far as the writ e has e writ petitioner is concerned, he has been wai en waiting for his due promotions sin s of ons since long, and also in terms of the Rule Rules which are applicable to the o s, he o the other clinical departments, he possesse ssesses the minimum qualifications. I tions ions. If the said same qualifications are requi required to be adopted for the depa and e department of Biotechnology and Molecula olecular Medicine, the petitioner would s the r would have been eligible, but as the approval proval has yet to be given by the St ision the State Government, the decision taken by en by the University in not considerin r for sidering the case of the petitioner for promotio omotion cannot be objected to. The or - The order passed by the University- appellant pellant, therefore, cannot be said to be to be unjustified or illegal. 20. In view view thereto, the order dated 22.10.20 udge .10.2019 passed by the Single Judge is set as set aside. We, therefore, direct the ke a ct the State Government to take a decision ion regarding approval of qua f qualifications for t of the post of Professo ofessor/Senior Professor for the depa and e department of Biotechnology and MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-285-2020 (O (O&M) Page 9 of 9 Molecula olecular Medicine, PGIMS, Rohtak, w nths tak, within a period of three months from tod m today. 21. If the ap the approval is given, the University t the ersity would be free to conduct the exercise ercise accordingly, and if the exercise se of ercise is being conducted, the case of the writ writ petitioner shall be considered st of dered for promotion to the post of Professo ofessor/Senior Professor, departme and partment of Biotechnology and Molecula olecular Medicine, within a period of t of three months thereafter. 22. Appeal i ppeal is accordingly allowed to the afo the aforesaid extent. 23. All pend ll pending applications also stand dispo d disposed of accordingly. (SANJE ANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) (ME JUDGE 08.01.2025 Mohit goyal 1. Whether 2. Whether ther speaking/reasoned? ther reportable? Yes/No Ye Yes/No Ye MOHIT GOYAL 2025.01.13 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document