This post is a summary of judgment wherein the applicant applied for the last spell of study leave from 25.02.2021 to 24.08.2021 to complete his Ph.D. In this regard, the applicant has made multiple representations.
The Court held, “I direct Respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representations of the applicant regarding grant of study leave by passing a reasoned and speaking order within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”
Judgment digest
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH
O.A. No.060/00174/2021
Also Read- Gaurav Gangwar vs Technical Education,U.T on 13 March, 2019
Applicant:
Gaurav Gangwar son of Sh. Hari Nandan Singh Gangwar, age 48 years, resident of House No. 2115, Sector 27, Chandigarh presently working as Associate Professor (Group ‘A’ Post), Chandigarh College of Architecture, Sector 12, Chandigarh (U.T.)
Respondents:
- Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh through Advisor to Administrator, UT Secretariat, Sector 9, Chandigarh-160009.
- Secretary, Technical
Education, UT Administration, Sector 9, Chandigarh – 160009.
- Principal-cum-HOD, Chandigarh
College of Architecture, Sector 12, Chandigarh (U.T.) – 160012.
Argued by:
For the Applicant: Mr. D.R. Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Arvind Moudgil, Advocate
Quorum:
AJANTA DAYALAN, MEMBER (A)
Also Read- Sohan Lal Saharan vs Union Of India Through Secretary
Facts and evidence presented by both parties.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant. He states that the applicant is presently an Associate Professor in the field of Architecture at the Chandigarh College of Architecture, Chandigarh. He was due for promotion from 2019 onwards. However, as Ph.D. is a necessary condition for promotion to the post of Professor, the applicant has not yet been promoted as Professor. Learned counsel for the applicant further states that the applicant had taken study leave in spells of six months for completing Ph.D. with the IKG Punjab Technical University. Three such spells of leave from 01.07.2019 to 31.12.2019, then from 01.02.2020 to 31.07.2020, and then again from 25.08.2020 to 24.02.2021 have already been sanctioned by the competent authority. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has now applied for the last spell of study leave from 25.02.2021 to 24.08.2021 to complete his Ph.D. In this regard, the applicant has made multiple representations dated 22.10.2020 (Annexure A-12), dated 12.11.2020 (Annexure A 14), dated 25.11.2020 (Annexure A-15), dated 03.12.2020 (Annexure A-20), and the latest being dated 15.01.2021 (Annexure A-21). However, the leave is yet to be sanctioned through the earlier leave is to expire on 24.02.2021. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has regularly been submitting his annual reports to the University as established by the reports at Annexure A-17. However, the University has perhaps not sent these reports onwards to the respondent department with the result that the respondent department has not received these reports from the University.
Also Read- Cat chandigarh Service matters – Legalseva.net
However, as far as the applicant is concerned, he has endorsed these reports to the respondent’s department also along with his representation. He states that the applicant has done his best and for the fault of the University, he is being penalized. The learned counsel further states that this is the last spell in which the applicant has to complete his Ph.D. degree, failing which it would not be possible for him to get the degree and thereby he will be denied consideration for promotion to the post of Professor for good. The applicant pleads that if directions are issued to the respondent department to consider the case of the applicant favorably and to give him one last opportunity for completing his Ph.D. in the period of leave now applied for, he will be satisfied. He also states on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is ready to face any consequence imposed by the respondent department in case he does not complete the degree in the time now being sought by him i.e. up to 24.08.2021. Mr. Arvind Moudgil, learned Standing Counsel for the U.T. Administration, appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He does not object to this limited prayer made by the applicant’s counsel subject to the condition that at least two weeks be granted to the respondents to take a decision in the case.
Also Read- College of Architecture: Battle over principal’s post
Judgment:
In view of the above, I direct Respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representations of the applicant regarding grant of study leave, including the one dated 03.12.2020 (Annexure A-20) addressed to him, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The order so passed will take into account the position of Rules and Regulations in the matter as well as facts of the case. A copy of the order passed shall be communicated to the applicant.
Also Read- CAT dismisses teachers’ plea to extend retirement age to 65
For case specific advice, please contact Chandigarh Administrative Tribunal/Service Matter/Labour and Service/CAT/Legal Aid/Administrative/Senior/Service Employment Lawyers Advocates in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur etc.
For more info, call 9988817966.
