news details |
|
|
| `Illegal’ appointments in SKUAST Court dismisses former VC’s application | | | Jammu, July-29 (JNF):- Special Judge Anticorruption Jammu Pawan Dev Kotwal has dismissed the application filed by Dr. Nagendra Sharma former Vice Chancellor SKUAST for arraigning other persons namely Dr. AK Srivastava former Director SKUAST presently Vice Chancellor Merrut University and Dr. AK Bakshi presently Director NDRI Karnal as accused in the present case and also seeking further investigation of case.
In the application Dr. Nagendra Sharma accused in much publicized alleged illegal appointments filed this application with the prayers that the members of the screening committees and selection boards for appointment of beneficiaries alleged to have been appointed by accused person by misusing official position have not been arrayed accused despite the fact that draft sanction prepared by the Govt reveals their names. It has been further said that the investigating agency did not deliberately approach the competent authority for grant of sanction for prosecution of Dr. AK Srivastava from the Governor of UP and Dr. AK Bakshi from the Indian Council of Research and therefore, the investigation is unfair, tainted, biased and partial the appointments had been made by the accused only on the recommendations of members of those committees and letting of those persons by the Investigating Agency, itself shows the unfairness on their part. It is also submitted that seeking sanction against 15 persons including the members of such committees further shows that the offence was established against the left out persons also, but subsequently dropping of those persons from the final sanction granted by the competent authority vindicates applicant's person that charge-sheet had been laid by adopting pick & choose method and offending the doctrine and therefore, left out persons need to be arrayed as accused or atleast direction to the Vigilance Organization to investigate further and obtained sanctions from competent Authority. CPO Parshtom Sharma opposed the applications and filed written objections.
While dismissing the application the court observed that the grant of sanction is absolutely and exclusively in the discretion of sanctioning authority. Law is well settled that where sanction is granted its validity is open for Court's scrutiny, but declining of sanction cannot be questioned in the Court. Even validity of sanction is to be considered at the appropriate stage and even if it is found at any point of time that same is invalid, the defect does not warrant further investigation. However, the contention of application that wrong forum was approached by Investigating Officer for grant of sanction against Dr. AK Srivastva and Dr. AK Bakshi requires consideration, Court is of the view that if applicant succeeds in showing that VC SKUAST was not competent to grant sanction, the prayer can be granted atleast to direct the Investigating Agency to approach competent authority. However, in this case both of them at the time of occurrence were working as in SKUAST as Director-cum-Dean and Director Research and therefore in view of the section 27 of SKUAST Act 1982, the appointing authority was Vice Chancellor and accordingly competent to grant sanction for prosecution. In this case admittedly at the time of so called illegal appointments, the persons Dr. AK Srivastva and Dr. AK Bakshi were removable by VC of SKUAST and therefore he was competent authority to grant sanctions but he has declined sanctions cannot be interfered either by the Investigating Agency or even by the Court by passing any direction and dismissed the application and fixed August 13, 2011 for arguments on framing of charge. JNF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
