Allowed

D. Kuteswar Raju v. National Institute of Technology and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Feb 2021I.A.(Civil)/220/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauchati High Court allowed an interlocutory application permitting a probationary Assistant Professor to attend an upcoming promotion interview (8000 AGP) despite the pendency of a sexual harassment complaint. The court directed the institute to keep the result of the interview in a sealed cover for the main writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to participate in interview for 8000 AGP; result to be kept in sealed cover and filed before the Court in the next hearing.

D. Kuteswar Raju Vs National Institute of Technology… — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010017142021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/220/2021

¶5

in WP(C) No. 7942/2019

¶6

D. KUTESWAR RAJU

¶7

S/O. V SATYANARAYANA RAJU, R/O. FALT NO. 82, BLOCK 7, TYPE III QTRS., NIT, SILCHAR CAMPUS, PIN- 780010, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND 2 ORS. SILCHAR, ESTD. UNDER THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2007 BEING REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF GOVERNORS CUM DIRECTOR, NIT, SILCHAR, PIN- 780010, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM

¶10

2:INTERNAL COMPLAIN COMMITTEE NIT SILCHAR BEING REP. BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICER MRS UJWALA BARUAH NIT SILCHAR PIN- 788010 DIST- CACHAR ASSAM 3:THE REGISTRAR NIT SILCHAR PIN- 788010 DIST- CACHAR ASSA

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. P CHAKRABORTY

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NIT

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

BEFORE

¶15

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶16

ORDER

¶17

08-02-2021

¶18

Heard Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the applicant/writ petitioner and Mr. S. P. Choudhury, learned Standing counsel, NIT for all the respondent/opposite party Nos. 1 to 3.

¶19

The applicant/writ petitioner herein is an Assistant Professor of Grade-II in the Department of Electrical Engineering at Level 10 of Pay Matrix on probation by the Board of Governors of NIT, Silchar.

¶20

On the basis of a complaint lodged by a student of the said Department regarding sexual harassment on her by the petitioner, an Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) was constituted by the respondent NIT under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Sexual Harassment in the Workplace Act, 2013 and the said Committee submitted its report against the petitioner. Apprehending his termination from his said service in the NIT, the petitioner preferred the connected WP(C) No. 7942/2019 challenging the said report of the ICC stating that the same is in blatant violation of the provisions of said 2013 Act and the Rules framed thereunder and also in violation of the provisions of natural justice without furnishing him the documents and/or the testimonials used against him by the said Committee and without giving him any opportunity to defend himself.

¶21

The Court after hearing the said WP(C) No. 7942/2019, by order dated 30.10.2019 while issuing notice to the respondent NIT, in the interim observed that no adverse action shall be taken against the petitioner i.e., the present applicant herein, without the leave of the Court.

¶22

By the said order dated 30.10.2019, passed in WP(C) No. 7942/2019, the Court also allowed the petitioner, applicant herein to appear in the interview for his promotion to the 7^th (7000) Academic Grade Pay (AGP), that was fixed on 12.11.2019. Pursuant to the same, the applicant appeared in the said interview before the respondent NIT for his promotion to the 7000 AGP but the result of the same has not yet been declared.

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

By this application filed on 29.01.2021, the applicant/writ petitioner has submitted that tomorrow i.e., on 09.02.2021 is the date fixed for the interview for the 8000 AGP to be conducted by the respondent NIT and if, due to non declaration of the result of his interview for 7000 AGP, he is debarred by the respondent NIT to appear in the interview for the 8000 AGP that is scheduled tomorrow i.e., 09.02.2021, he will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

¶25

On being enquired, Mr. Choudhury, learned Standing counsel, NIT, Silchar appearing for the opposite parties/respondents submitted that the result of the interview of the petitioner for his 7000 AGP that was held on 12.11.2019 has not yet been declared by the respondents.

¶26

After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, the Court is of the view that because of non declaration of the result of the applicant’s interview for the grant of 7000 AGP that was conducted by the respondent NIT on 12.11.2019 till date, the interview in which the applicant/petitioner participated pursuant to the order of the Court dated 30.10.2019 passed in the connected WP(C) No. 7942/2019, he cannot be debarred or obstructed or restrained by the respondent NIT to participate in the interview for the grant of 8000 AGP due to no fault of him.

¶27

Considering the above, the respondent authorities in the NIT is directed to allow the present applicant, writ petitioner of WP(C) No. 7942/2019 to participate in the interview for his promotion/grant of 8000 AGP to be conducted by the respondent NIT, that is scheduled tomorrow i.e., on 09.02.2021.

¶28

However, it is made clear that the respondent NIT shall kept the result of the interview of the present applicant, writ petitioner of WP(C) No. 7942/2019 regarding grant of 8000 AGP to him in sealed cover and shall place the same before the Court on the next date of listing of the connected WP(C) No. 7942/2019.

¶29

With the above observation this Interlocutory Application (C) stands allowed to the extent above.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

Comparing Assistant

D. Kuteswar Raju v. National Institute of Technology and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D. Kuteswar Raju v. National Institute of Technology and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Kakati and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ajit Pegu Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Dhira Kakati Gayan Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Abdul Ali Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Zafar Shwarif Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Jarina Khatun Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.