HC stays Central university's order to cancel appointment

Days after the Central University of Haryana (CUH) authorities here cancelled the appointment of its Assistant Professor (Physical Education), the Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed the CUH’s order while hearing the petition filed by the Assistant Professor, Dr Gajender Singh, against it.

The CUH authorities, in an order issued by the Registrar on December 11, cancelled the appointment, stating that as per the report of the committee formed to verify the economically weaker section (EWS) certificate submitted by him is manoeuvred by concealment of facts.

“On receiving a complaint regarding the validity of the certificate, the CUH formed a committee. It reached the conclusion that the petitioner’s family property was over five acres, which was the maximum limit prescribed for a person to be considered as belonging to EWS category, and cancelled the appointment on December 11 vide an order passed by the Registrar with the approval of competent authority,” claimed a CUH official.

While the petitioner’s counsel said the order was without jurisdiction and the Registrar had no authority to cancel the appointment as the appointing authority was the Executive Council (EC), he also contended that the very basis of cancelling the appointment was not sustainable since the petitioner owned less than five acres, and had rightly been issued the category certificate, which was valid.

“The committee’s report, based upon which the impugned order was passed, relied upon the fact that petitioner’s father also owned some land that made the total landholding of the family above five acres. This was factually incorrect, since at the relevant time, the petitioner owned land within the prescribed limit, and only after his father’s demise on 2.6.2022, the share of ancestral land was mutated in his name on 22.11.2022,” the counsel claimed.

The CUH’s counsel contended that the petitioner’s services had been rightly terminated. The order had been passed by the competent authority/Vice-Chancellor under the University Act.

He further contended that as per the criteria in instructions dated 25.02.2019, the property held by a family in different places/cities had to be clubbed while applying the land or property holding test to determine EWS status. Accordingly, at the time of applying for the post, the petitioner’s total family holding, after including his father’s land, was more than the maximum prescribed limit. It showed the certificate was wrongly procured by the petitioner, he added.

The interim order of the high court issued on Thursday stated that the court was prima facie of the view that the petitioner’s status as an EWS category candidate stood unchallenged as on date. The certificate had not been cancelled or withdrawn. Besides, the transfer of ancestral land in the petitioner’s name on the demise of his father, by way of subsequent mutation dated 22.11.2022, could not take away his status retrospectively.

The case has been adjourned to March 28.

Meanwhile, Vice-Chancellor Tankeshwar Kumar said the EWS certificate had been sent to the DC concerned for cancellation.