Disposed

Sandeep Kaur v. Guru Nanak Dev University and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jul 2021CWP/12894/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two writ petitions filed by teachers regarding their service and eligibility for reappointment. An interim order had previously assured them against relief despite appointment changes. The respondents guaranteed that pending experience certificates would be accepted during consideration, preventing immediate rejection based on delay.

What did the court decide?

Both writ petitions were disposed of with the assurance that the University would consider the petitioners' cases irrespective of the delay in submitting experience certificates.

Sandeep Kaur Vs Guru Nanak Dev… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CWP Nos.12894 & 12998 of 2021

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

114

¶5

Civil Writ Petition No.12894 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 23, 2021

¶6

Dr. Sandeep Kaur

¶7

..........Petitioner.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Guru Nanak Dev University and another

¶10

........Respondents.

¶11

¶12

114-A

¶13

Civil Writ Petition No.12998 of 2021 (O&M)

¶14

Jatinder Kaur and others

¶15

..........Petitioners.

¶16

VERSUS

¶17

Guru Nanak Dev University and another

¶18

........Respondents.

¶19

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. S. SANDHAWALIA

¶20

Present: Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶21

(The proceedings are being conducted through video conferencing, as per instructions)

¶22

¶23

G.S. SANDHAWALIA, J.(Oral)

¶24

This order will dispose of two civil writ petitions captioned

¶25

above, filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

¶26

The facts have been taken from CWP No.12894 of 2021.

¶27

Counsel for the petitioner(s) has submitted that the petitioner

¶28

SACHIN MEHTA 2021.07.26 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶29

-2-

¶30

CWP Nos.12894 & 12998 of 2021

¶31

was employed as a part time lecturer with respondent No.2 on 18.07.2016 (Annexure P-1). She had been relieved from service and then filed CWP No.5193 of 2021. Similarly, in CWP No.12998 of 2021, petitioners had also approached this Court on the ground that they were being dismissed from service and posts have been re-advertised and on appointment of teachers on contract basis, they are liable to be relieved. An interim order dated 20.03.2017 has been passed in CWP No.5592 of 2017 in their favour that they would not be relieved.

¶32

In the meantime, advertisement No.3/2021 dated 18.03.2021 (Annexure P-3) had been issued, advertising the said posts of Assistant Professor (Punjabi) in three colleges, the cut off date of which was 11.04.2021. It is further submitted that apprehending that petitioner was being replaced by similarly situated person in view of the fact that there was mention that their appointment may be initially for the period of two years on contract basis extendable on yearly basis upto the age of 70 years, she had filed an application in the said case. Statement had been made that these appointments will be on regular basis and thus, she could only apply for the requisite experience certificate on 12.04.2021 (Annexure P-7) after the cut off date. The requisite certificate was issued on 30.04.2021 (Annexure P-8) after the cut off date and thus, in such circumstances, consideration is sought of the petitioner's case. Apart from that, it is the case of the petitioners that on account of being part time lecturers, their experience certificates are not being considered for the purpose of marks, which are to be given, since teaching experience of less than an academic year is ignored.

¶33

Notice of motion.

¶34

SACHIN MEHTA 2021.07.26 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶35

-3-

¶36

CWP Nos.12894 & 12998 of 2021

¶37

Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents. He submits that petitioners' case shall be considered for appointment irrespective of the delay as such on account of pending experience certificate. He, however, submits that the benefit of teaching experience is given as per the advertisement and the criteria adopted by the Syndicate. He submits that petitioners could have a right as such to agitate separately in case, they do not make the cut off and writ petitions are premature at this stage.

¶38

This Court is in agreement with the said submission made. The petitioners only have apprehension at this stage. . The assurance has been held out that their case will be considered and will not be rejected on account of late submission of experience certificates. In case, the petitioners do not make the cut off on account of experience certificate as part time lecturer issued to them, it is always open to them to challenge the selection, which is yet to be finalised.

¶39

Accordingly, both the writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid assurance.

¶40

( G. S. SANDHAWALIA ) July 23, 2021 JUDGE Sachin M.

¶41

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶42

SACHIN MEHTA 2021.07.26 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Sandeep Kaur v. Guru Nanak Dev University and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kaur v. Guru Nanak Dev University and Anr.

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

Satyawan Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Madhu Goel Vs Pankaj Mittal and Ors.

Jagiro Devi and Anr. Vs Dalbir Singh and Anr.

Shivraj Singh and Another Vs Jagjit Singh and Others

Jatinder Kaur and Others Vs Guru Nanak Dev University and Another

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others