Note: This story has not been edited by LegalSeva and is generated from a news syndicate feed.

HC dismisses plea challenging IIM Rohtak director’s appointment

Court said petitioners who filed the plea appeared to be the “front faces” of two employees, whose services were terminated by Dheeraj Sharma

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed a petition challenging 2017 appointment of Dheeraj Sharma, director of the Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Rohtak.

The high court bench of justice Kuldeep Tiwari also set aside a show-cause notice issued to him over alleged concealment of academic qualifications, served upon him by the Centre in 2022. Dheeraj Sharma was appointed in 2017. His first term as the IIM-Rohtak director came to an end on February 9, 2022, and in the same year, he got a second term on February 28. The petition challenging his appointment was filed by one Amitava Chaudhary and others, in 2019 seeking quashing of his appointment.

The court said that petitioners who filed plea against Sharma appeared to be “front faces” of the two employees, whose services were terminated by Sharma. The court said that Search-cum-Selection Committee (SCSC) constituted by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), was empowered to recommend the names of candidates shortlisted on account of their eligibility criteria and also from the category of “eminent persons”.

“…the SCSC recommended the name of Dr Dheeraj Sharma for appointment to the post of director under the category “nomination from eminent person”, and that, the SCSC was well empowered to do so,” the court said.

There is no wrangle amongst the contesting litigants that Dheeraj Sharma did not possess a first class Bachelor’s degree, the requirement for the post of director. Yet the recommendation of his name was made by the search committee based on consideration of his resume, it added. “… (it) clearly speaks in volume that, it was recommended absolutely under the category “nomination from nent person”. This can be clearly inferred from the intra-departmental communications,” the court said. The court further said Memorandum of Associa tion of IIM, Rohtak and other relevant rules leave no room for any doubt that, the appointing and disciplinary authority to the post of director was the Board of Governors (BoG) and not the MHRD. “Consequently, this court has no hesitation to hold that, the MHRD did not have any juris diction to serve the impugned show cause notice, and that, the impugned show cause notice suffers from the vice of lack of able jurisdiction,” it said, refer emiring to 2022 notices served upon the director by the Centre on allegations about his educa-tional qualification.

THE PROBE WAS ORDERED BY THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA, WHO IS ALSO “VISITOR OF THE INSTITUTE” AND HOLDS THE HIGHEST DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY OVER MAJORITY OF CENTRALLY-RUN INSTITUTIONS

Notably, in March, the Centre ordered a probe into allegations of financial bungling at IIM Rohtak during the tenure of Sharma.

The probe would also look into the issue of alleged concealment of vital information about the academic qualification of the director, an issue dealt with by the court in this petition as well.

The probe was ordered by the President of India, who is also “visitor of the institute” and holds the highest decision-making authority over majority of centrally run institutions.

The development was the first such action by the Centre after amendments were made to the IIM Act in 2023 to make the President the Visitor of IIMs.

For case specific advice, get in touch with best Service Lawyers Punjab and Haryana High Court District Court Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Derabassi Kharar.

More on 99888-17966

Service Lawyer HighCourt Chandigarh