TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | Time CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

HC allows IIM Rohtak Board to meet, puts decisions on hold

Acting on a petition filed by Rohtak IIM Director Dr Dheeraj Sharma for quashing orders for conducting an inquiry against him and sending him on a long leave, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today allowed the scheduled meeting of...
Punjab and Haryana High Court. File photo
Advertisement

Acting on a petition filed by Rohtak IIM Director Dr Dheeraj Sharma for quashing orders for conducting an inquiry against him and sending him on a long leave, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today allowed the scheduled meeting of the Board of Governors to proceed. The Bench, at the same time, made it clear that any decision taken would be kept in abeyance until the next hearing.

Advertisement

The direction by Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj came as the arguments on the petition remained inconclusive. Appearing before the Bench, Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain with Central government counsel Shreyansi Verma sought more time to conclude arguments. He told the Bench that he was held up in following a “Full Bench” hearing. He was also to appear for the Full Court Reference.

Advertisement

Inquiry against IIM Rohtak Director

“Noticing the contention and also taking into consideration that meeting of the Board of Governors is scheduled for today, let the meeting be held, however, the decision, if any, be kept in abeyance till the next date of hearing,” Justice Bhardwaj asserted, while fixing the matter for April 2.

The petitioner through senior advocate Chetan Mittal with counsel Vivek Singla contended that the respondents passed the impugned order of March 5, “wherein an inquiry has been ordered on account of financial irregularities and also non-supply of Bachelors’ degree for the first term.”

Advertisement

They contended that the impugned action stemmed from the complaints made by the dismissed employees, which were inquired into by the CAG in 2023 and closed by it. The orders were without jurisdiction. The ministry concerned ordered the inquiry against the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 10A of the Indian Institute of Management Act. It was incorporated and enforced with effect from August 16, 2023, while the inquiry was ordered for a prior period. “The settled law is that an amendment is prospective in nature unless it is specifically made retrospectively applicable,” it was added.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement