Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Kashmir Vs. Dr. Bashir Ahmad Ganaie &
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 6780 of 2001
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) 20628 of 2000)
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) 20628 of 2000)
Petitioner: Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Kashmir
Respondent: Dr. Bashir Ahmad Ganaie & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 6780 of 2001
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) 20628 of 2000)
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) 20628 of 2000)
Judges: B.N. KIRPAL, N. SANTOSH HEGDE & P. VENKATARAMA REDDI, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Sep 27, 2001
Head Note:
CIVIL LAW
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 39, rules 1 and 2 with Sher-e-Kashmir University (Amendment) Act, 1998 (Act No. VII of 1998) – Section 50C – Injunction – Bifurcation of university – Respondent already posted at Jammu – No post held in University of Kashmir – Trial court granting injunction and directing appellants to post the respondent at appropriate position. Held that interim injunction ought not to have been granted. (Para 4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Special leave granted.
2. Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology which was established in 1982 was bifurcated by Amendment Act VII in 1998. As a consequence thereof, two universities were established – one at the valley in Kashmir and the other in Jammu. The question involved in this case was whether respondent no. 1 should be assigned to the university at Jammu or at Kashmir. According to the appellant herein, the said respondent had already been posted at Jammu before the bifurcation took place on 20th September, 1999. Challenging his deployment at Jammu, respondent no. 1 had filed a suit before the additional district judge, Srinagar. By a detailed order, the additional district judge directed as follows :
“In view of the above observations and in view of the law relied upon, it is clear that the plaintiff/applicant has established a very strong prima facie case. It has been established that if the relief sought in the interim application is not granted, he will suffer an irreparable loss and balance of convenience is in his favour. In view of these observations, the application warrants to be granted and is accordingly granted and the defendants 1 to 5 are directed to post the plaintiff/applicant on a post commensurate with his merit, qualification and seniority. They are further directed to release the salary of the plaintiff/applicant withheld from November, 1999. The application is accordingly disposed of, however, the findings returned in this application shall have no bearing on the final outcome of the main suit. The application shall form part of the main suit.”
3. The challenge to the said order was unsuccessful. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
4. We have gone through the documents on record and are of the opinion that it will cause prejudice if any detailed order is passed by referring to various letters and appointment letters which had been issued. It appears to us that the trial court ought not to have granted any injunction. It is evident from the order of the trial court that respondent no. 1 was at that time not holding any post under the university of Kashmir as it was for that reason that defendant nos.1 to 5 were directed to post respondent no. 1 at an appropriate position. According to the appellant-university, the salary is being paid to respondent no.1 but there is no post which is vacant as of today. Inasmuch as the interim injunction ought not to have been granted, this appeal is allowed and the orders of the trial court as well as that of the High Court are set aside. As a result thereof, respondent no.1 will have to comply with the university’s letter dated 7th July, 1999 requiring him to report at Jammu for posting orders.
5. Under section 50C of the Amendment Act No. VII of 1998, the chancellor may, in consultation with the pro-chancellor, pass appropriate orders regarding allocation of employees of the erstwhile undivided university. In our view, it would be appropriate if the respective universities make a reference to the chancellor within one month for appropriate orders. We hope that the order passed by the chancellor would be acceptable to all.
1. Special leave granted.
2. Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology which was established in 1982 was bifurcated by Amendment Act VII in 1998. As a consequence thereof, two universities were established – one at the valley in Kashmir and the other in Jammu. The question involved in this case was whether respondent no. 1 should be assigned to the university at Jammu or at Kashmir. According to the appellant herein, the said respondent had already been posted at Jammu before the bifurcation took place on 20th September, 1999. Challenging his deployment at Jammu, respondent no. 1 had filed a suit before the additional district judge, Srinagar. By a detailed order, the additional district judge directed as follows :
“In view of the above observations and in view of the law relied upon, it is clear that the plaintiff/applicant has established a very strong prima facie case. It has been established that if the relief sought in the interim application is not granted, he will suffer an irreparable loss and balance of convenience is in his favour. In view of these observations, the application warrants to be granted and is accordingly granted and the defendants 1 to 5 are directed to post the plaintiff/applicant on a post commensurate with his merit, qualification and seniority. They are further directed to release the salary of the plaintiff/applicant withheld from November, 1999. The application is accordingly disposed of, however, the findings returned in this application shall have no bearing on the final outcome of the main suit. The application shall form part of the main suit.”
3. The challenge to the said order was unsuccessful. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
4. We have gone through the documents on record and are of the opinion that it will cause prejudice if any detailed order is passed by referring to various letters and appointment letters which had been issued. It appears to us that the trial court ought not to have granted any injunction. It is evident from the order of the trial court that respondent no. 1 was at that time not holding any post under the university of Kashmir as it was for that reason that defendant nos.1 to 5 were directed to post respondent no. 1 at an appropriate position. According to the appellant-university, the salary is being paid to respondent no.1 but there is no post which is vacant as of today. Inasmuch as the interim injunction ought not to have been granted, this appeal is allowed and the orders of the trial court as well as that of the High Court are set aside. As a result thereof, respondent no.1 will have to comply with the university’s letter dated 7th July, 1999 requiring him to report at Jammu for posting orders.
5. Under section 50C of the Amendment Act No. VII of 1998, the chancellor may, in consultation with the pro-chancellor, pass appropriate orders regarding allocation of employees of the erstwhile undivided university. In our view, it would be appropriate if the respective universities make a reference to the chancellor within one month for appropriate orders. We hope that the order passed by the chancellor would be acceptable to all.
