The Madras High Court today upheld the showcause notice issued to Pondicherry University Vice Chancellor Chandra Krishnamurthy who was kept under compulsory wait on charges of plagiarism and for furnishing a 'fraudulent' resume while applying for the post.
"This court is satisfied that the procedural fairness is certainly adopted in the case of the petitioner (the VC). She has been given all the requisite documents as sought for. The petitioner, instead of giving a reply, has rushed to this Court. This Court does not find any malafides in passing the order impugned," Justice M M Sundresh said.
The HC said it neither found any malice in law nor facts. The petitioner had not demonstrated it before the HC.
Dr Chandra Krishnamurthy took charge on February 1, 2013 for a five-year term. She was served a showcause notice on August, 21 2015, asking her to explain why she should not be dismissed. Initially, she was placed on "compulsory wait". She then moved Court.
On the University's reference, UGC formed a fact-finding committee which gave its report on August 10, 2015, stating she was guilty of plagiarism and misrepresentation. Later, over 1,200 students signed a petition, levelling charges of 'improper' administration.
Puducherry government then constituted a two-member team to look into their grievances. The Chief Secretary gave a report to the Union Home Ministry on the situation, based on which she was asked to proceed on leave till normalcy returns. She did so from August 14 to 21, purportedly on some personal work.
Thereafter, the showcause notice was issued to her on August 21.
The VC submitted today that the showcause notice was without jurisdiction. Section 16 of General Clauses Act, 1897 cannot be pressed for a case of this nature. There was also no provision to form fact-finding committees, the VC said.
She said a preliminary inquiry cannot be a replacement for a general one. Neither was a charge memo issued nor was there any Inquiry Officer. All proccedings had been initiated at 'instigation' of some non-teaching staff. So they will have to be set aside on the ground of malafides.
She said she was not given enough chance before one of the committees and there is no power to keep her on compulsory wait. In its absence, it is unsustainable in law. As long as she is VC, she cannot be prevented from doing lawful activities.
Additional Solicitor General G Rajagopalan, counsel for the HRD Ministry, VC's appointing authority and the University's counsel said as per Section 16 of General Clauses Act, the appointing authority is competent to act to dismiss an employee on proven charges.
The VC was also examined by the committees. Instead of replying to the showcause notice, she had moved the Court, they said.
There is no malafide as alleged against the HRD Ministry. Though she was given all documents, petitions had been filed as if it were not so. The compulsory wait order was passed based on relevant material, including the report of the Pondicherry government, they contended.
The HC said the power to appoint under Sec 16 of General Clauses Act also includes power to suspend or dismiss.
"Thus the petitioner's contention that there is no power or authority to the HRD Ministry to pass the impugned order cannot be sustained, especially when for the reasons aforesaid, this Court does not find any merits in these writ petitions. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed.
