High Court · 2025

1. Mr. Harendra Belwal, counsel for t he appellant . learned

2. Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, counsel for t he respondent s. learned There is delay of 78 days in filing 3. t he appeal. Prayer for condonat ion of delay is not opposed by learned counsel for t he respondent s. For t he reasons st at ed in t he delay 4. condonat ion applicat ion, t he sam e ( I A No. 1 of 2024) is allowed. The delay in filing t he appeal is hereby condoned. This int ra- court appeal is direct ed 5. against t he final order dat ed 06.09.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in WPSS No. 1688 of 2024. The order dat ed 06.09.2024, t he writ pet it ioner, is ext ract ed below: - im pugned by “ Mr. Harendra Belwal, learned counsel for t he pet it ioner.

2. counsel for respondent s. Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, learned

3. By m eans of t his writ pet it ion, t he pet it ioner has challenged t he order dat ed 09.08.2024 ( annexure no.1) issued by t he t he respondent - Est ablishm ent Officer of Universit y, whereby t he pet it ioner has been dism issed from service. Learned counsel for t he respondent - 4. Universit y raised a prelim inary obj ect ion st at ing t herein t hat t he order of dism issal, m ay be challenged by t he pet it ioner under Sect ion 23 of U.P. Agricult ural Universit ies Act , 1958.

5. I n t his view of t he m at t er, t he writ pet it ion is dism issed. 6. The pet it ioner m ay avail rem edy available t o him under t he aforesaid Act .” t he

6. Appellant cont ends t hat Sect ion 23 of The Ut t ar Pradesh ( Krishi Evam Prodyogik Vishwa Vidyalaya Adhiniyam ) , t he 1958 would not be at t ract ed present case and t he said provision is at t ract ed appoint m ent of a person, as m em ber of any aut horit y of quest ion, or where a quest ion arises, as t o whet her any decision of t he Universit y or an aut horit y of t he Universit y is in conform it y wit h t he provisions of t he Act and St at ut e, t hen t he m at t er has t o be referred t o t he Chancellor for decision. t he Universit y elect ion learned 7. Mr. Harendra Belwal, counsel appearing t he appellant subm it s t hat writ pet it ioner ( appellant herein) was serving as Group ‘D’ em ployee ( Agricult ural Labourer) , who was dism issed from service based on convict ion by a crim inal court ; he had challenged dism issal order in a writ pet it ion and learned Single Judge erred in relegat ing him t o t he rem edy under Sect ion 23 of t he Act . He furt her subm it s t hat against t he order of punishm ent passed by Vice- Chancellor, t he person concerned has a right t o appeal t o t he Board of Managem ent , t he order passed by learned Single Judge needs t o be m odified t o t he said ext ent . t herefore,

8. Learned counsel for t he appellant has placed reliance upon t he provision cont ained in Clause 4( d) ( ii) of Chapt er XXV of t he St at ut e of t he Universit y, which is ext ract ed below: - “ 1 2 ( 4 ) ( d ) ( i i ) I f t he or der of punishm ent is ( 1) by t he Vice- Chancellor, t he person affect ed shall hav e t he right t o appeal t o t he Board of Managem ent and ( 2) by t he Board of Managem ent t he per son affect ed shall have t he right t o request for a review by t he Board.” This Court finds subst ance in t he 9. subm ission m ade by learned counsel for t he appellant . As per provision cont ained in Clause 4( d) ( ii) of Chapt er XXV of t he St at ut e of t he Universit y, an order of punishm ent passed against a Group ‘D’ em ployee of t he Universit y is appealable before Board of Managem ent . I n such view of t he m at t er, we 10. m odify t he order im pugned in t his appeal and perm it t he appellant t o challenge t he t he Board of dism issal order before Managem ent , t he provisions cont ained in t he st at ut e of t he Universit y. in accordance wit h

11. Wit h t he aforesaid direct ion, special appeal st ands disposed of. ( A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J.) ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.)

28.02.2025 Aswal