Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Dr.Mausumi Goswami Vs The Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

Home
Madras HC
2026
Dr.Mausumi Goswami Vs The SecretaryDr.Mausumi Goswami v. The Secretary

Disposed¶34

Dr.Mausumi Goswami v. The Secretary

Madras HC5 Feb 2026WP/1606/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Service-law writ petition (Madras High Court, single judge, decided 05.02.2026): university employee (Assistant Professor, Vellore Institute of Technology) relieved by letter dated 23.09.2025 without show cause notice after increment withheld and promotion denied; relieving order kept in abeyance pending grievance process; Court ordered reinstatement within one week and referral of grievances (Clause 6.3, HR Manual) to the Grievance Committee; petition disposed of, no costs. Keywords: reinstatement, relieving letter, wrongful termination, grievance redressal, Grievance Committee, UGC, Vellore Institute of Technology, Article 226, certiorarified mandamus.

What did the court decide?

Reinstatement of the petitioner into service within one week; liberty to ventilate grievances before the Grievance Committee, which shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; no order as to costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

Why is it important?

In view of the respondents' submission that the impugned relieving order has been kept in abeyance, the Court directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶29

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Reinstatement of the petitioner into service within one week; liberty to ventilate grievances before the Grievance Committee, which shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; no order as to costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned relieving letter dated 23.09.2025 issued by the 4th respondent without any show cause notice ought to be quashed and the petitioner reinstated / allowed to continue her employment.

Court's answer

In view of the respondents' submission that the impugned relieving order has been kept in abeyance, the Court directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty granted to the petitioner to ventilate her grievances, if any, before the Grievance Committee, and the authority shall thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT (M. Dhandapani, J.) — W.P.No.1606 of 2026, disposed of on 05.02.2026. Mausumi Goswami, appointed Assistant Professor (Department of Chemistry, Vellore Institute of Technology) on 03.06.2019, alleged denial of promotion despite seven years' post-doctoral experience, abrupt withholding of her 2025-26 annual increment, and issuance of a relieving letter dated 23.09.2025 (VIT/HR/2025/5277) by the Registrar without any show cause notice; she sought a certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 to quash it and to continue in employment. As both sides recorded that the relieving order had been kept in abeyance and her letter dated 22.10.2025 had been referred to the Grievance Committee under Clause 6.3 of the HR Manual, the Court directed reinstatement within one week and left further grievances to the Grievance Committee to be resolved in accordance with law; no costs; connected W.M.P.No.1652 of 2026 closed.

A

WP No.1606 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05.02.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

W.P.No.1606 of 2026 in W.M.P.No.1652 of 2026

Mausumi Goswami

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1.The Secretary, University Grants Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.

2.The Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632 014.

3.The Vice Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632 014.

4.The Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632 014.

..Respondent(s)

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records pertaining to impugned relieving letter vide VIT/HR/2025/5277 dated 23.09.2025 passed by the 4^th Respondent and quash the same, and further direct the 2^nd Respondent to allow the Petitioner to continue her employment.

__________ Page1 of 5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP No.1606 of 2026

For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Deepak for M/s.Apex Law Office LLP For Respondent(s): Mrs.V.Sudha, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel for R-1 Mr.A.Saravanan for RR-2 to 4

ORDER

Aggrieved by the relieving order dated 23.09.2025 passed by the 4^th respondent, the petitioner is before this Court.

It is the case of the petitioner that she was appointed as Assistant Professor in the Department of Chemistry at Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore on 03.06.2019. Despite the petitioner having possessed post doctoral experience of seven years, he was not granted promotion whereas her juniors were promoted to higher posts. Hence, the petitioner submitted several requests to senior authorities concerned seeking a fair and transparent evaluation and level upgradation to which, no response was forthcoming. Further, the petitioner’s annual increment for the year 2025-26 was abruptly withheld and thereafter, the impugned relieving letter dated 23.09.2025 was issued to her without any show cause notice. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

__________ Page2 of 5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP No.1606 of 2026

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, today, the respondents filed a letter dated 04.12.2025 stating that the impugned order dated 23.09.2025 has been kept in abeyance and the petitioner’s letter dated 22.10.2025 is treated as a Grievance as provided under Clause 6.3 of the HR Manual and the same is forwarded to the Grievance Committee. He further submitted that the petitioner may be reinstated into service.

Learned Central Government Standing counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent submitted that the relieving order under challenge has been kept in abeyance and that the Grievance committee will hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders after affording him an opportunity of personal hearing.

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

In view of the submission made by the learned Central Government Standing Counsel that relieving order impugned has been kept in abeyance, there shall be a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to ventilate her grievances, if any, before the Grievance Committee and thereafter, the authority shall pass

Page3 of 5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP No.1606 of 2026

appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no

order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.

05.02.2026

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

NHS

To

1.The Secretary, University Grants Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.

2.The Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632 014.

3.The Vice Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632 014.

4.The Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632 014.

__________ Page4 of 5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP No.1606 of 2026

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

NHS

W.P.No.1606 of 2026 in W.M.P.No.1652 of 2026

05.02.2026

__________ Page5 of 5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the impugned relieving letter dated 23.09.2025 issued by the 4th respondent without any show cause notice ought to be quashed and the petitioner reinstated / allowed to continue her employment.¶22
The court held
In view of the respondents' submission that the impugned relieving order has been kept in abeyance, the Court directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶29

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶15
HR ManualClause 6.3¶26

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Relieving letter vide VIT/HR/2025/5277 dated 23.09.2025 passed by the 4th Respondent (Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology), issued without any show cause notice after the petitioner's annual increment for 2025-26 was withheld.¶22
4th Respondent - The Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology · 23.09.2025
Prior proceeding
Petitioner appointed Assistant Professor, Department of Chemistry, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore on 03.06.2019.¶22
Prior proceeding
Despite seven years' post-doctoral experience, petitioner was not promoted while juniors were promoted to higher posts; requests for fair evaluation and level upgradation drew no response.¶22
Prior proceeding
Petitioner's annual increment for the year 2025-26 was abruptly withheld.¶22
Prior proceeding
Respondents filed a letter dated 04.12.2025 stating the impugned relieving order has been kept in abeyance and the petitioner's letter dated 22.10.2025 is treated as a Grievance under Clause 6.3 of the HR Manual, forwarded to the Grievance Committee.¶26
Prior proceeding
Counsel for the 1st respondent confirmed the relieving order under challenge has been kept in abeyance and the Grievance Committee will hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.¶27

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Mausumi Goswami¶7
S.Deepak
respondent
The Secretary, University Grants Commission¶10
V.Sudha
respondent
The Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology¶11
A.Saravanan
respondent
The Vice Chancellor, Vellore Institute of Technology¶12
A.Saravanan
respondent
The Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology¶13
A.Saravanan

Coram

AI extract

M.DHANDAPANIauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 5 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 10 Jan 2026
Case no.: WP/1606/2026
CNR: HCMA013003112025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: M.dhandapani
Disposal: DISPOSED OF WITH DIRECTION
Case type: W.P.

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from M.dhandapani

D.Bharath Vs the State of Tamil Nadu
4 Feb 2026
S.Kavitha Vs State of Tamil Nadu
4 Feb 2026
P.Ramu Vs The Principal secretary/Commissioner of Labour
4 Feb 2026
M.Pasumponraja Vs the Board of
5 Feb 2026
S.Mahalakshmi Vs the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
5 Feb 2026
L.Murugesan Vs The Management of
5 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Dr.Mausumi Goswami v. The Secretary, WP/1606/2026 (MAD), decided on 5 February 2026.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226
HR ManualClause 6.3

View all statutes

Procedural history6

Relieving letter vide VIT/HR/2025/5277 dated 23.09.2025 passed by the 4th Respondent (Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology), issued without any show cause notice after the petitioner's annual increment for 2025-26 was withheld.4th Respondent - The Registrar, Vellore Institute of Technology · 23.09.2025
Petitioner appointed Assistant Professor, Department of Chemistry, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore on 03.06.2019.
Despite seven years' post-doctoral experience, petitioner was not promoted while juniors were promoted to higher posts; requests for fair evaluation and level upgradation drew no response.

View full history

Bench / Coram

M.DHANDAPANI

Parties & counsel