Allowed

Dr. Amit Chaudhary v. Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2021WRIA/3366/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the refusal of a 'No Objection Certificate' by his present employer, preventing his appointment as Assistant Professor. The court followed a prior precedent finding such refusal arbitrary and illegal, set aside the refusal, and directed issuance of the certificate and confirmation of appointment.

What did the court decide?

Communication dated 4 February 2021 set aside; Respondent 1 directed to issue 'No Objection Certificate'; Respondent 3 directed to consider said certificate and confirm petitioner's appointment.

Dr. Amit Chaudhary Vs Uttar Pradesh University of… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3366 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Dr. Amit Chaudhary Respondent :- Uttar Pradesh University Of Medical Sciences And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Varun Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Rohit Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Shambhvi Tiwary, Advocate holding brief of Shri Rohit Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

This petition was entertained on 19.3.2021 and following orders were passed:-

¶7

"Sri Rohit Pandey, advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2. Issue notice to respondent nos.3 and 4. Steps by registered speed post be taken within a week. All the respondents may file counter affidavit within six weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

¶8

List thereafter.

¶9

Till the next date of listing, petitioner's candidature for appointment in the respondent no. 3 university shall remain subject to the outcome of the present petition."

¶10

The office report on records suggest that despite notice on respondent nos. 3 and 4, no one has put in appearance, as such the notice is deemed to be sufficient.

¶11

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is Super Specialist Doctor with excellent academic professional qualifications and was desirous of participating for appointment in terms of the Advertisement No. 10/B-2020 issued by the respondent no. 3-University for filling up the post of Assistant Professor, Department of Vascular Surgery. In terms of the said advertisement, the petitioner was called for

¶12

interview schedule and in the said call letters, it was provided that the petitioner would be required to produce 'No Objection Certificate' from the present employer, the respondent no. 1.

¶13

The petitioner claims to have applied for the 'No Objection Certificate' from the respondent no. 1-University, which has not been provided to the petitioner till date. The petitioner approached the respondent no. 3, who in turn allowed the petitioner to appear in the interviews, however, it was provided that the petitioner shall produce the 'No Objection Certificate' in the event of his being selected for the post in question.

¶14

The petitioner claims that he has been selected as a successful candidate for the post of Assistant Professor, Department of Vascular Surgery and for the other post also where he is on the merit list. In the meanwhile, the respondent no. 1 -University refused to grant 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioner merely on the ground that there are only two members/professors available in the respondent no. 1- University and further on account of Covit-19 contingencies continuing and in terms of the order dated 11.8.2020, the 'No Objection Certificate' stood refused by the communication dated 4th February, 2021, which is under challenge in the present writ petition, as also a direction has been sought against the respondent no. 3 to consider the candidature of the petitioner, if the prayer no. 1 is allowed.

¶15

The similar question with regard to an order passed by an Institute in not granting 'No Objection Certificate' came up for consideration before this Court in Writ-A No. 6909 of 2020 (Dr. Prashant Pratap Singh and others Vs. Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences and Another). The Court vide order dated 27.7.2021 allowed the writ petition holding that the conditions leading to refusal of the 'No Objection Certificate' were wholly

¶16

arbitrary and illegal and accordingly directed the issuance of 'No Objection Certificate' and further directions were issued to the Institute in question to consider the candidature of the petitioners therein.

¶17

I have perused the said judgment, which is a well considered judgment. Thus, following the said judgment and agreeing with the reasoning given therein, I have no hesitation in holding that the reasons recorded in refusing the 'No Objection Certificate' in the order dated 4th February, 2021 are wholly arbitrary and illegal.

¶18

Accordingly, the communication dated 4th February, 2021 is set aside. The respondent no. 1 is directed to issue 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioner within a period of two weeks of the petitioner approaching the respondent no. 1-University. It is further directed that the respondent no. 3-University shall consider the 'No Objection Certificate' granted by the respondent no. 1-University and as directed by this Court for confirming the services of the petitioner on the post of which he has been selected. The respondent no. 3 shall further confirm the selection and appointment of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Professor, Department of Vascular Surgery, which has been withheld only on account of non-furnishing of 'No Objection Certificate' by the respondent no. 1.

¶19

The writ petition is allowed in terms of the said order.

¶20

Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be treated as certified copy of this order.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.8.2021 S. Rahman

Dr. Amit Chaudhary v. Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Amit Chaudhary v. Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Pratap Singh Vs Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission

C/M Parwati Devi Junior High School and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Isar Ahmad Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jagnnath Shahi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Km. Shashi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others