Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, June 5: State High Court has declined to stay the appointment of Dr Shashi Gupta as Principal of the Government Medical College and invited objections from her as well as State in a petition filed by Dr Indu Kaul, Professor Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
In the petition, Dr Indu Kaul submitted that all the promotions made in favour of Dr Shashi Gupta were in violation of the Medical Education Gazetted Service Recruitment Rules of 1979 and in utter disregard to the constitutional guarantees given under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Dr Kaul sought redrawing of the seniority of the private respondent consequent upon her period of unauthorized absence from duty for over four years having been treated as dies-non for the purpose of all service benefits including seniority and promotion.
She also prayed before the court for issuance of directions to the State, Secretary General Administration Department, Public Service Commission to place her above Dr Shashi Gupta in seniority and consequently be ordered to be placed as Head of Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. She also sought directions for necessary departmental and legal action against those responsible for issuance of Government order No.494-HME dated July 26, 1996 by which Dr Shashi Gupta was promoted as Assistant Professor after allegedly forging the date of her promotion.
Senior Advocate U K Jalali appearing for Dr Indu Kaul submitted that having acquired eligibility prior in point of time for promotion against the post of Assistant Professor than private respondent (Dr Shashi Gupta), Dr Indu Kaul should have figured senior to the private respondent and therefore would be eligible to discharge her duties not only as Head of Department but even would be eligible for appointment as Principal.
Advocate W S Nargal appearing for Dr Shashi Gupta, Principal GMC submitted that grievance of the petitioner to act as Head of Department was conceded by virtue of order dated June 1, 2013 whereby petitioner has been allowed to look after the working of the department in the light of MCI guidelines. He submitted that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed as the petitioner has challenged the seniority of Dr Shashi Gupta after keeping mum for more than 17 years.
“The allegation of the petitioner that private respondent had gone on unauthorized leave is factually incorrect as she had sought proper and prior permission from the Government”, Advocate Nargal said, adding “the period of leave has been treated as dies-non, which order has not been called in question in the present writ petition”.
It was further argued that the period of absence of Dr Shashi Gupta with effect from February 7, 1989 to December 27, 1993 was treated as dies-non in terms of Article 163 of J&K CSR read with SRO 321 of 1995 dated December 7, 1995 and as per SRO 321 the import of term dies-non was specific to the extent that it doesn’t cause any interruption for the past service qualifying for pension.
After hearing both the sides, Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur declined to stay the appointment of Dr Shashi as Principal of GMC and observed, “the issue with regard to eligibility of the petitioner to figure senior than the private respondent requires further consideration for which detailed objections from the private respondent as well as State are required”.
The High Court granted six weeks time to file objections and Senior Advocate Jalali was directed to file rejoinder to the objections within two weeks thereafter.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel