www.PunjabColleges.com
Largest database of Universities and Colleges in India situated in more than 9000 towns.
Home   Contact Us
Enter College / University Name or City:
Punjab Colleges
Pvt Institutes in Punjab


Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar, Punjab



Contact


Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar, Punjab
Address:P.O. - G.N.D.U Campus
Amritsar (District Amritsar)
Punjab, India
Pin Code : 143005


Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is a University recognised by UGC. Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab was established on / in November 24, 1969.


Principal of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is Prof RK Mahajan.

Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is situated in Amritsar of Punjab state (Province) in India. This data has been provided by www.punjabcolleges.com. Amritsar comes under Amritsar Tehsil, Amritsar District.

Fax # of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is +91-183-2258819, 2258820.

Contact Person(s) of the Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is (are): Dr Gurnam Singh Telephone: +91-183-2558237, Prof Dr Ajaib Singh Brar, Telephone: +91-183-2258811, 2258822.

Residence Phone No(s) of concerned peron(s) of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is (are) : +91-183-2450159.

Mobile No(s) of concerned persons at Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab are 99141-16916, +91-99154-84758, 9888999790, 9417144849.

email ID(s) is Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar Punjab

Website of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is www.gndu.ac.in/, www.gnduonline.org. www.metpamcat.org.

Additional Information about Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab is : University Campus
Deptt. of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guru Nanak Dev University
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guru Nanak Dev University, AMRITSAR - 143 005 Punjab
Dr Preet Mohinder Singh Bedi
bedi_preet@yahoo.com
B Pharm.

Vice Chancellor : Dr SP Singh Telephone: +91-98142-25278, Ajaib Singh Brar.

Registrar : Dr Inderjit Singh (Former Principal of Guru Nanak Khlsa College, Ludhiana), Dr RS Bawa, Dr Sharanjeet Singh Dhillon.


Contact Details of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab are : Telephone: +91-183-2258802-09 Extn. 3019
Security Officer: Col Harbans Singh
GNDU Teachers Association President Dr Davinder Singh Johal, Secretary Dr Lakhwinder Singh

Academic Staff College: Director Dr TS Benipal
Dean Students Welfare : Dr MD Singh
Telephone: +91-183-2258802-09[Extn. 3155]
Residence Telephone: +91-183-2256205
BK Gupta 98140-03887
Surjit Singh 98148-21290, 2258802-09 Extn 3223 GNDU Telephone: +91-183-258811, 258822, 258855, 258913, 258820, 258819, 2258802-09

Prof MP Satija, Head, Dept of Library and Information Science
Dr. Rattan Singh, Head, Department of Laws
Balbir Singh Garcha, Secretary, Non Teaching Employees Association
Prof MS Hundal, Dean Academic (earlier he was Prof in Chemistry Dept. He also remained as Dean College Development Council. EduSat Co-ordinator additional charge will continue to remain with him)
Prof PK Sehajpal, Dean Student Welfare
Prof RK Mahajan, Prof Incharge Exams
Prof Sharanjit Singh Dhillon, Prof Incharge Finance & Development
Prof Amarjit Singh Sidhu, Prof I/c publications
Prof BS Bajwa, Director Hospitality
Dr Mohan Kumar, Reader Academic Staff College
Prof Rajinderjit Kaur Puar, Dean College Development Council (She is Prof in Law Dept)
Senior Asstt: Balwinder Singh
Staff members:
Director: HS Randhawa
Dr Hardeep Singh, Prof I/c, Placement Dept


Courses

PhD, M Phil, M.Tech, MSc, MCA, MEPN, M.Com, M.Pharmacy, M.LIB, MP.Ed, LLM, MA, B.Tech, B, Pharmacy, LLB, B.Architecture, BP. Ed, Other Diploma Courses
M.Ed.


Profile of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU)

Guru Nanak Dev University was established at Amritsar on November 24,1969 to mark the 500th birth anniversary of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji. It is both a residential and an affiliating university. In conceiving the future course of the University, the objectives enshrined in the Guru Nanak Dev University Act 1969, emphasised that the new University would make provision for imparting education and promoting research in the humanities, learned professions, sciences, especially of applied nature and technology.

Studies and research on the life and teachings of Guru Nanak, in addition to working towards the promotion of Punjabi language and spreading education among educationally backward classes and communities were the other commitments. In consonance with these expectations, the University in its eventful history of 35 years has taken long strides in spreading the message of the Guru and promoting education in such fields as science, arts, management, information technology, industrial technology, environment, planning and architecture. Carefully nurtured by committed academia, the University has carved a niche for itself in the academic world. The motto of the University as engraved on its emblem Gurus wisdom illumines all speaks of the vision and idealism for which the University stands. Spread over a stretch of 500 acres towards the west of the City, Guru Nanak Dev University presents a picture of modern architecture. Traditional red brick geometrical blocks represent its regard for time-honoured values and commitment to scientific advancement.

Making its humble beginning in an annexe of the adjoining Khalsa College, the University today boasts of 37 academic departments, two regional centres, two colleges and a score of support service departments besides several administrative offices. In recent years, the University has diversified in a big way its programmes into applied sciences making it one of the distinguished centres of industry related job-oriented courses. It is highly innovative in designing its teaching and research programmes and offers a comprehensive range of general and applied courses. Very early on, it decided to restructure its syllabi on the basis of recommendations made in the reports of the Curriculum Development Centres (1988). Admission to courses at all levels is made strictly on the basis of National, state and University level entrance tests. At present, nearly 5000 students are studying on the Campus, 4 College, All India Services Training Centre, Instrumentation Centre, Computer Centre, 24 hour internet facility, Placement Unit etc.

To promote research among its faculty, almost all the Departments have been provided with independent computer facilities, internet connectivity and departmental libraries. In addition to the academics, the University has also created necessary facilities for recreation and all round development of students and faculty in the form of Department of Youth Services, National Service Scheme, a 900 seat all purpose auditorium, half a dozen seminar and conference halls, a modern hi-tech sports complex, sports hostel, faculty club, students centre, health centre, day care centre, two separate holiday homes at Dalhousie for teachers and students, working women hostel, Baba Buddha College Bhawan along with oncampus residential facilities for a large number of students, teachers and administrative staff. The Campus with its lush green grounds, swaying fields, blossom laden tree lined lanes provides a most conducive physical environment for work and progress. The University takes pride in the fact that its community over the years has developed a great participative work culture. The University has won Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Trophy 17 times and inter-versity youth festival championship four times consecutively. UGC has granted the University Centre for Excellence in Sports Sciences. National Assessment and Accreditation Council accredited the University at the "Five Star Level". Being rated at such a high level will inspire its community to make strides ahead still faster and stronger with academic excellence and commitment to social upliftment as the core ideals. a very large number of them being girl students drawn from the neighbouring countryside.

The University has contributed tremendously in accessing higher education to women in this otherwise educationally backward area. Being an affiliating University, it also .performs the parenting role of directing and monitoring the academic programmes of more than 100 colleges located in the five districts of Amritsar, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Nawanshehar and Gurdaspur, some of which have a long and creditable history of imparting higher education since late nineteenth century. Over the years, the University has built up an excellent academic infrastructure in the form of a well stocked computerised library, state-of-the-art laboratories, Academic Staff.

Stuff



Images / newspaper cuttings related to Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU)

Construction of Sports Hostel for boys (Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU))
Tender: 21st October, 2014
Construction of Sports Hostel for boys
GNDUs youth fest gets underway (Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU))
News: 18th October, 2014
GNDUs youth fest gets underway

Anti ragging committee constitutes at GNDI (News)
GNDU syndicate meeting held (News)
Supply of freeze dryer (Tender)
Supply of answer sheers (Tender)
Zonal Youth Festival kicks off (News)
GNDU colleges faculty fails to attend Modi drive on Oct 2 (News)
Orientation Program held (News)
Varsity to honour Asiad Silver Winner (News)
Students to participate in business games (News)
GNDU College rusticates nine (News)
Two injured in clash, six booked (News)
Purchase of book scanner (Tender)
Dinanagar college lifts GNDU overall trophy (News)
GNDU holds seminar on International peace (News)
Zonal youth fest starts (News)
Fashion show held (News)
Auto driver run over by GNDU students, four booked (News)
GNDU holds inter college gatka tourney on Sept 5 (News)
Manpreet Kaur done top in MCom (News)
GNDU declares exam results (News)
Theatre workshop at GNDU (News)
GNDU results declared (News)
University to host special workshop on art (News)
CCTV Cameras to scrutinize college campus (News)
SC employees promotion par rok (News)
5,5 crores used for Synthetic track (News)
HC ne promotion me reservation ki screening par lagain rok (News)
Dhillon elected as new Registrar (News)
Dr Dhillon elected as Registrar (News)
VC ki tanashahi barkrar (News)
GNDU holds syndicate meeting (News)
Protest over molestation attempt in hostel (News)
GNDU wich girls de hostel wich chedchad da mamla (News)
VC se naukjhonk, Kia jaam (News)
Sadak par utar aye students (News)
Students protest for road safety (News)
GNDU to raise hostel wall height (News)
Students demands security on campus (News)
Girl molested, varsity students protest poor security (News)
Man again intrudes into GNDU girls hostel, molests fresher (News)
Hostel girl scared of intruder (News)
SC students denied admission under centrally sponsored scheme (News)
Academic college meeting organised (News)
Results of various courses (News)
Lack of dustbins leads to garbage dumps (News)
GNDU result declared (News)
B Tech student drowns in Ravi (News)
B Tech and B Arch courses (Admission Notice)
GNDU forms panels for Gurdaspur campus (News)
HC asked answer from GNDU (News)
B Tech and B Arch courses (Admission Notice)
GNDU constitutes various committees for smooth functioning of varsity (News)
Pathankot girl tops B Ed exam of GNDU (News)
MA Punjabi course restarted (News)
Asstt Professor and JRF (Job Vacancy)
Students participate in hiking tracking camp (News)
Purchase of cream wove paper (Tender)
BSc in Home Science (Admission Notice)
GNDU College starts professional courses for poor students (News)
GNDU marks International Biodiversity day (News)
MBA and MCA Programme (Admission Notice)
GNDU extend extension of retired teachers (News)
M Phil and MA in Punjabi (Admission Notice)
Congress seeks probe into Badals stay at GNDU (News)
GND Varsity squad tops sailing event in Pong Dam (News)
Govt responsible for fee hike in colleges, GNDU VC (News)
Teachers welcome GNDU syndicates decision (News)
Four day Jashan begins (News)
299 crores will use on GNDU (News)
Green belt set afire at GNDU, green warriors jittery (News)
40th Annual convocation (Convocation)
GNDU tie up with Jerman University (News)
GNDU Academic Council meeting held (News)
Seminar on Swami Vivekanand at GNDU (News)
MP of winnipeg kevin visit GNDU (News)
Khaka will support to GNDU (News)
Senate meeting held (News)
Shot of funds, cant cut fee, GNDU VC (News)
Management dont discounts in fees to students (News)
No fee refund if leaving without attending class (News)
Alumni Association website started (Alumni Meet)
Students cannot be penalized for university fault, HC (News)
GNDU faculty facilitated (News)
GNDUs lifelong learning dept offers hope to matric and 12th pass dropouts (News)
Intruder enters GNDU hostel, girls perturbed (News)
Foundation day celebrated (News)
Foundation day celebrated (News)
Seminar on Guru Nanak ends (News)
Foundation day celebrated (News)
Rs 2 lakh by SGPC for Guru Nanak studies department (News)
Experts dwell upon Guru Nanaks teachings (News)
VC Ajaib Singh Brar honoured to Abhishek Verma for Asian Archery Championship (Profile)
Seminar on green sciences begins (News)
Online submission of HPLC tender (Tender)
Folk singer Reshma remembered at GNDU (News)
GNDU tie up with Fraser Valley University (News)
GNDU inks MoU with Canadian University (News)
Students enjoyed in Youth fest (News)
BSc and B Com result announced (News)
GNDU prof gets National Academy of Medical Sciences fellowship (News)
SC Chairman notice to VC (News)
Swimming Championship held in GNDU (News)
GNDU regsitrars service extended (News)
Youth Fest begins on energetic note (News)
Construction of Academic Block (Tender)
Construction of Academic Block (Tender)
Seminar on Languages (Profile)
Champ GNDU has no sports hostel (News)
Police atrocities on student (News)
Youth Fest started (News)
Harpreet shines in Youth Fest (News)
Supplementary examination from 26th of sept (News)
Supply of Answer books (Tender)
Malkeet Singh elected as SOI head (News)
Youth Fest program start (News)
Youth Fest program held (News)
Voter list ready by GNDU (News)
Lecture on e banking (Profile)
Librarian (Job Vacancy)
22nd times GNDU won Maka Trophy (News)
GNDU land lease protested (News)
Meeting of Principals for salary matter (News)
Supply of Water Tank (Tender)
Maintenance of heritage village in Amritsar (Tender)
Fellowship awarded (Profile)
MBA ki ketli me majburi ki chaye (News)
B Arch course (Admission Notice)
Management suspended to employees in fraud case (News)
Gaganpreet done top in MSc (News)
GNDU girls harassed near hostel two held (News)
Girls hostel me mili sharab ki khali bottles (News)
Two students nabbed for harassing girls (News)
B Tech course (Admission Notice)
B Tech course (Admission Notice)
B Tech course (Counselling)
Garment exhibition and PCS coaching (Profile)
Seminar on Sustainable Manufacturing and Operation Management (News)
MCom result announced (News)
Law degree to students (News)
Navjeet Sidhu done top in MA English (News)
BTech course (Admission Notice)
MSc Student 3rd floor se kudi, maut (News)
MSc Hons (Admission Notice)
Anmol done top in LLB (News)
Conflict between Rakesh Mahajan and Rajnish Bharadwaj over Amarnath Yatra Issue (News)
Asstt Professor (Job Vacancy)
Last date for Civil Services coaching is 19th of July (News)
PhD course (Admission Notice)
Dr Atima Sharma done top in BSc (News)
Students shines for hiking and trekking camp (News)
Ashish Arora first in BCom final year (News)
24 players awarded (News)
MBA program (Admission Notice)
MCA FYIC (Entrance Test)
PG Courses (Admission Notice)
Supply of Furniture (Tender)
Students pass VC allegation report to CM (News)
Dismiss VC, probe GNDU working (News)
End of teacher hadtal (News)
Shooting ke liye GNDU chunegi team (News)
Shooting compitition in Russia (News)
Chief Secretary karenge GNDU me aniyamitao ki jaanch (News)
VC ke paksh me aaye Seniors Professor (News)
Hiking tracking camp (News)
UG and PG Courses (Admission Notice)
Teachers ke andolan ka samarthan (News)
Post Graduate degree courses (Admission Notice)
Benefit of Pension (Public Notice)
Purchase of fan capacitor (Tender)
BTech in Food Tech (Admission Notice)
Demands ko lekar VC ko ghera (News)
Biodiversity day celebrated (News)
MBA (Admission Notice)
Teachers nu bakaya di adayegi jald (News)
Sophisticated Equipment (Tender)
Dal bal ke sath VC pahunche admin block (News)
Arear ko lekar VC and GNDU aamne samne (News)
Design pending for 6 months, HC (News)
GNDU de adhoc data entry operator ho sakde ne berojgar (News)
Answer sheets ki karvai jaanch, NSF (News)
Fellowship awarded and refresher course (Profile)
Athlete Compitition (News)
Answer sheet of Students misplace (News)
Bhukh hadtal start from 23 (News)
Vehicles ki diggiyo par choro ne kiye haath saaf (News)
VC ki manmarjiyo virudh mahol garmaya (News)
BTech, MSc and M Arch (Admission Notice)
Offset Printing Machine (Tender)
Supply of pipes (Tender)
Purchase of Electric Celing (Tender)
GNDU start new courses (News)
Sarabhjeet wife doing Peon job from 6 years in GNDU (News)
Grief Stricken of Sarabhjeet (News)
BTech Students honoured and Musical Programme (Profile)
Presentation on traffic problems (Profile)
Shina first in MA History (News)
University se bahar nikale gaye dono employees (News)
Case on 4 Students (News)
Monica first in MSc Computer (News)
GNDU me gambling ka bhandafod (News)
DAV College Students in merit (News)
MA and MCom ki datesheet dabdeel (News)
Paper hone ke baad pta chala k paper leak tha (News)
Renu first in MA semester 3rd (News)
MSc fashion design me ladkiyo ne mari bazi (News)
Virodh dekh University ne khinche kadam piche (News)
Disha Sharma ne kiya naam roshan (News)
Research Associate and Technical Asstt (Tender)
Construction of Blocks (Tender)
Honhar Student awarded (News)
DGP Chander Shekhar done PhD (News)
Geetika Jalota University topper (News)
Good result (News)
Akanksha first in Physics (News)
Bullet Bikes te rok (News)
Construction of Boundary Wall (Tender)
Prof Hundal new Dean (News)
GNDU steals bikers thunder (News)
3 days camp on Health and Beauty (News)
End of Indo french workshop (News)
Seminar by Human Genetic Dept (News)
Seminar on Punjabi Language (News)
Harpreet, Sanchi adjudged best athletes (News)
Answer sheets (Tender)
Ban of Bullet bikes in GNDU (News)
Kulbeer first in MSc 1st semester (News)
Manisha 3rd in BSc (News)
Mehndi lagana bhi kisi kala se kam nahi (News)
University ko 136.40 crore ka padh sakta hai, ghata (News)
GNDU won overall trophy (News)
GNDU samet 4 teams semi final me (News)
GNDU walk up on Rajasthan team (News)
GNDU ko walk over (News)
GNDU ke 800 Students ko di gayi degrees (News)
Dr Chugh and Dr Nakade awarded with degrees (News)
Auction for old batteries (Advertisement)
Answer sheets (Tender)
Environmental hazards and Orientation course etc (Profile)
Course of preparation of UGC exam (News)
BBK won Cycle Championship (News)
39 th Annual Convocation (Convocation)
Classes started from 18th March for UGC preparation (News)
200 se zyada rogiyo ki jaanch (News)
GNDU me Punjabi Language diwas manaya (News)
Shiksha me badlav aa raha hai, Dr Inderpal (News)
University ne wapis liya decision (News)
Sahitya sabha dvara University ke faisle ki alochna (News)
Kho Kho me GNDU bna vijeta (News)
GNDU ke samaksh teachers ne jalai schular ki pratiya (News)
Sadko par utre College teachers (News)
GNDU de teachers hadtal te gaye (News)
Punjabi Varsity emerge overall champs etc (Profile)
Teachers stop to run tha class after 2 nd period (News)
Ab marks se nai ho payegi ched chad (News)
Seminar on University Pensioners scheme (News)
Teachers sangathno se milegi kendriye punjabi lekhak sabha (News)
Bhasha, Samaj vigyan aur commerce ke periods me katoti (News)
GNDU wich Punjabi de period ghataun virudh ekjutt hoye Punjabi (News)
GNDU vallo Punjabi te fir maar (News)
39th Annual Convocation (Convocation)
Purchase of 200 Computers (Tender)
All India Inter University Championship in GNDU (News)
39 th Convocation from 8 March (News)
Tirandazi pratiyogita se 9 universities bahar (News)
Principal Students ko Govt Program me nahi bhejenge (News)
GNDU wich Inter University komi teer andaji mukable shuru (News)
Inter University tirandaji shuru (News)
University college me Placement par seminar (News)
Teerandazi Championship shuru (News)
GNDU Amritsar overall champion (News)
Boys me PU Patiala 2 nd (News)
Bangalore ki Meghna rahi vijeta (News)
GNDU Exams from 13 May (News)
Nahi suljha GNDU me chal rha vivad (News)
GNDU me shooting program me bawal (News)
Students ko patak patak kar peeta, 2 ke sar futeh (News)
Shooters attacked during AIU C ship (News)
All India inter university mukable shuru (News)
Athletics meet and Hods appointment etc (Profile)
Inter College judo championship karvai (News)
GNDU nu Potential for Excellence da darja (News)
GNDUTA ki VC ko behas ki chunoti (News)
Hockey team of GNDU runner up in North Zone (News)
Youth Fest winners honoured and Certificate Course etc (Profile)
Christmas par hastkala pardarshni lagai (News)
Lagatar 40 th baar jiti Championship (News)
28 Jan ko hoga Clerks ke future ka faisla (News)
Testing of EPABX system (Tender)
International Conference on Animal Environment (News)
Dr Rajesh Kalia is President of Officers Association (News)
End of ONGC Maharaja Ranjit Singh Gold cup (News)
Safai karamchariyo ki hadtal 5 th day bhi shamil (News)
Blind bacho ka National khel shuru (News)
GNDU di Professor fellowship award nal sanmanit (News)
SGPC ne liya gambhir notice (News)
Safai karamchariyo ki bhukh hadtal shuru (News)
Supply and Installation of lifts (Tender)
Pardarshni me Mata Gujri Memorial College 3 rd (News)
Foundations day celebrations and revised dates for exams (Profile)
Stars of GNDU (News)
Ucheri sikhiya wich ghatdi ruchi te chinta da pragtava (News)
Students te kitabi gyan thopan di bajaye bodik samartha vadai jave (News)
Cricket Team of Doaba College awarded (News)
Computer System 125 pcs (Tender)
Fluorescence Spectrometer (Tender)
Best Veldrome and winners all the way (Profile)
SC ST diya Vacancies khali karn da mamla garmaya (News)
Khalsa Public School ke naam rahi Overall trophy (News)
BBK College first in Wrestling (News)
Railway bharti and GNDU exam on same date (News)
GNDU conduct coaching for civil services exams (News)
Jald hi bhari jayengi teachers ki vacancy (News)
MDU University results se dikhi asantusht (News)
Fest me GNDU ne fehraya parcham (News)
Youth Fest me APJ College chamka (News)
Festival Guldasta Unifest 2012 (News)
4 th day of Guldasta Unifest (News)
Guldasta Unifest doran natak te skitt mukable (News)
3 rd day kalakaro ne dikhai apni kala (News)
Guldasta Unifest 2012 par uthne lage swal (News)
Passenger Lift (Tender)
Classical Dance ke mukable karvaye (News)
Guldasta unifest 2012 (News)
Starting of Unifest 2012 (Advertisement)
Badminton Championship me bazi mari (News)
Guru Nanak College Batala bana University Champion (News)
GNDU ne Khitabi Jitt Hasal kitti (News)
Sophisticated Equipment (Tender)
Meet on neuro disorders etc (Profile)
GNDU ne PAU ko harakar jeeti Championship (News)
Varsity under and PG de exam 7 toh (News)
Clerk cum Junior Data Entry Operator (Job Vacancy)
GNDU ne PU Patiala ko haraya (News)
End of Technical Campus 2012 (News)
pistol and rifle me chayi students (News)
DAV khiladiyo ne mari lalkar (News)
Virasti gaav will made in GNDU (News)
73 Students 2 varsho ke liye bahar (News)
GNDU College ki team ko kiya walk out (News)
College Champion in Youth Fest (News)
Baring college ki team bani vijeta (News)
GNDU ke Law Students 4 th number par (News)
GNDU ne 10 Employes ko dikhaya bahar ka rasta (News)
GNDU me soofi chaier sathapit ki jayegi (News)
Leased Line (Tender)
Handball compitition me shaandaar pardarshan (News)
NJSA ki Cricket team ne match jeet kiya league me pravesh (News)
GNDU Non teaching staff (News)
Student ki khudkushi me sathi ko kaid (News)
University employes vallo imaandari di misaal pesh (News)
Supply and installation of EPABX system etc (Tender)
Sunil Khanna ne bante pratibhagio ko certificate (News)
Amritsar dictrict college da yuvak mela samapit (News)
Sugar research award and Zonal youth fest etc (Profile)
GNDU ke suraksha adhikari par hamla (News)
inter College Baseball Championship jeeta (News)
University employe ne kiya namankan pattar dakhil (News)
GNDU employes association da chaun module jari (News)
Inter College Championship jeeti (News)
Notice to Mr Navdeep Singh (Advertisement)
Hindi Language de vikas lai vishleshanatmak adhiyan te jor den di salah (News)
Leased line Internet Connectivity (Tender)
Seminar on History and Punjabi etc (News)
Study Table and Dining Table etc (Tender)
University wich vakh vakh Subjects te refresher course 20 sept. toh (News)
225 Students di TCS vallo placement (News)
GNDU wich Inter zonal youth festival 15 toh (News)
GNDU ke senate members niyukt kiye (News)
GNDU wich senate te syndicate meeting (News)
Electronics Technology Department di Building da udhghatan (News)
GNDU M Phil te PhD karn lai devegi Scholarship (News)
Project on bone health awarded and Symposium held etc (News)
Various types of Equipments (Tender)
Shri Guru Granth Sahib adhiyan kendar band houn kande (News)
GNDU da Shri Guru Granth Sahib adhiyen kender band houn kande (News)
40 Mbpa leased line internet connectivity (Tender)
Const. of 4 th and 5 th Floor of Emerging Life Science bldg etc (Tender)
farzi khiladiyo ka mamla garmaya (News)
Athletes allege GND varsity of leaving then in lurch (News)
Regarding the Supply of Answer Sheets (Corrigendum)
Nod to increase seats (Profile)
Supply of Answer Books (Tender)
Research samarth college ki ho rahi andekhi (News)
GNDU ko nahi mile Students admission ki date bhadai (News)
MBA and MCA Courses (Admission Notice)
BTech Course 2012 (Admission Notice)
Supply of Cement (Tender)
Pensioners Association di meeting (News)
BTech Course 2012 (Admission Notice)
Purchase of Flurescence microplate reader (Tender)
GNDU ke Students ka future daav par (News)
Professor Sethi GNDU di syndicate te senate de member niyukt (News)
Fees vridhi ke virodh me utri ABVP (News)
BTech and B Arch Courses (Admission Notice)
PhD Programme 2012 (Admission Notice)
PhD Programme 2012 (Admission Notice)
Const of Boundary wall (Tender)
Katal se pehle ayi thi dhamki bhari call (News)
Varsity girl killed in broad daylight (News)
Professor, Asstt Professor and Associate Professor (Job Vacancy)
GNDU ne javab dayar nahi kitta (News)
GNDU wich synidicate di ikatarta (News)
GNDU being coerced to drop compulsory study of Punjabi (News)
Data Entry Operators (Job Vacancy)
Educatinal exchange Programme and Special summer school etc (Advertisement)
Const of Boundary Wall etc (Tender)
GNDU me jeevan vigyan par refresher course (News)
Operating Contributory pension scheme (Tender)
Asstt Professor on Contract basis (Job Vacancy)
GNDU khudkushi sambandhi sarvekshan me pichda (News)
Messes contracts etc (Tender)
Online admission schdule (Advertisement)
Laser Raman Spectrometer (Tender)
GNDU fielded ineligible player (News)
MD,MBA and MCA Courses etc (Admission Notice)
Master Level Courses and Bachelor Level Courses (Admission Notice)
Supply of TMT Steel (Tender)
Supply of TMT Steel (Tender)
Varsity vallo session 12,13 de admissions sambandhi anusuchi jari (News)
Concession of Kashmiri migrants (News)
Radiator Cooled silent Diesel Generating set of 250 kva (Tender)
Principal on regular basis (Job Vacancy)
Honhar Students nu scholarship de check ditte (News)
Supply of Chemicals.Glassware and Equipments (Tender)
Construction of Blocks (Tender)
GNDU ne band kiya History and Culture Subject (News)
Director and Professor (Job Vacancy)
Annual theory exams,Blood group testing camp and Senior scientist award etc (Advertisement)
GNDU dvara Vocational holidays ke schdule jari (News)
BA part one ka elective English ka paper out of syllabus (News)
Punjabi, GND varsities postpone exams (News)
GND varsity VC gets extension (News)
VC diya sevava wich vada (News)
Under Graduation Courses me semester system lagu (News)
Kahani sangreh Tahni Tutte Guru Nanak Dev University wich release (News)
Teacher must help boost confidence of Students and Seminar on microbiology etc (Advertisement)
Prashanpatra syllabus se bahar aane par priksharthi preshan (News)
UGC Exams di tayari hitt subject course 2 April toh (News)
GNDU wich General Oriental Course samapit (News)
UGC Net de test di tayari lai ek vishesh course 2 April toh (News)
Guru Nanak Varsity vallo Professor aulakh nu fellowship (News)
GNDU ki UG ke exam 17 se (News)
Professor,Asstt Professor and Associate Professor etc (Job Vacancy)
Hans Raj Hans ne GNDU da visiting fellow thapeya (News)
Press reporters ka shishtmandal VC se mila (News)
Ab Hans Raj Hans ke geeton par PhD (News)
Message of Dr Jaspal Singh and Bhagwant Bhajan Singh etc (Profile)
Construction of School Building etc (Tender)
Singer Hans Raj Hans appointed visiting professor at GNDU (News)
GNDU di salana sports meet 13 toh (News)
National youth festival de jaitu sanmanit (News)
DNA damage prevention and Seminar on disease (Advertisement)
Construction of Girls Hostel (Tender)
Professors Ajayeb singh Brar Amity Acadamy Excellence Award (News)
GNDU ne International jhummar Championship trophy jitti (News)
Professor Brar National Magnetic Resonance Society of India de pradhan chune (News)
Inam vand samaroh doran honhar Students sammanit (News)
Institute sends proposal to identify heritage buildings (News)
GNDU and PU ke mukable rochak (News)
GNDU students to prepare drawings sketches of historic Gurdwaras (News)
Nilami Notice (Advertisement)
Online submission of admission form and fees (News)
Dr khandpur ko manad fellowship (News)
Shaad de navla te khoj karn wale Krishan nu Doctorate di degree mili (News)
GNDU wich 15th Punjab Science Congress shuru (News)
Students Lawyers should raise voice against injustice (News)
GNDU ke Colleges me nahi sunai denge sur taal (News)
Kanun and samajik niya wich ubhrde rujhan subject te 2 dina rashtriye seminar shuru (News)
Kanun and samajik niya wich ubharde rujhan subject te 2 dina national seminar shuru (News)
University vallo 15th Punjab Science Congress 7 toh (News)
Answer Sheets (Tender)
3 floor Lecture Theatre (News)
Humility Personified (Profile)
Guru Nanak Dev University ka 38th dishant samaroh sampan (News)
Infosys ke Chairman ko Doctorate ki upadhi (News)
Students apne sakratmak character se mushkilo ka mukabla kare (News)
Guru Sahib vallo ditte atam vishleshan sidhant te chalan di lod (News)
Antar University youth festival ki trophy Guru Nanak Dev varsity de naam (News)
GNDU di 38th Annual Convocation ajj (News)
Campus Notes (Advertisement)
PhD and M Phill Programmes (Admission Notice)
Body Builders for fabrication of latest Pun Bus type Bus Bodies (Tender)
Bus Body Builders for fabrication (Tender)
First Sikh VC for Jammu varsity (News)
GNDU diya mehila mulajma nu choun duty toh chutkara (News)
VC da GPS achiever award nal sanman (News)
VC vallo Students nu miari sikhiya karvaun te jor (News)
20 hazar rupaye me padega ek paper (News)
Campus Notes (Advertisement)
Punjabi ko dilaye dusri Languages ke brabar darja (News)
GNDU teachers ka pradarshan (News)
University Teachers vallo ragistrar office bahar dharna (News)
Guru Nanak Dev University de teachers ne choun duty te jataya rosh (News)
New year me GNDU ka gaurav badha (News)
GNDU me jimnastic championship ka aagaj (News)
Supply of TMT Steel (Tender)
GNDU wich Chemistry subject te refresher course sampan (News)
Guru Nanak Dev University wich 30 nu Holiday (News)
Construction of Girls Hostel (Tender)
GNDU Sikshko ne ghera VC Office (News)
Youth Festival de jaitu Students da sanman (News)
GNDU vallo inter weight lifting mukable hun january toh (News)
GNDU under SC panels scanner (News)
Mixograph and Farinograph etc (Tender)
Chemistry Subject te 3 weeks da refresher course shuru (News)
Campus Notes (News)
Contruction of Girls Hostel etc (Tender)
Construction of Girls Hostel etc (Tender)
GNDU wich English subject da refresher course shuru (News)
Guru Nanak Dev Varsity stone to be laid next year (News)
Short Term Tender Notice (Advertisement)
Nankana Sahib me Hogi Guru Nanak Dev Vishav vidyalya ki Sthapna (News)
Sikhiya niti nu mud ghokhan di lod (News)
Navia liha pa rahi hai Guru Nanak Dev University (News)
College Students da Painting mukabla (News)
Principal required (Job Vacancy)
Jithe shudh hava vikdi hai (News)
Punjabi Language de rutbe nu hor ucha chukkan di lod (News)
GNDU di Punjabi Adhiyan bare Pehalkadmi (News)
Campus Notes (News)
GNDU ne Punjabi subject vare Vidvana to mangi Raye (News)
GNDU de Antar Vibhagi Volleyball Mukable Sampann (News)
Appeal (Advertisement)
Guru Nanak Dev University wich rahegi pehla wangu Punjabi (News)
GNDU da sthapna diwas 24 nu dhumdham nal manaya javega (News)
A conflict economy behind much terror says Proffesor (News)
Imported Fluorescence Spectrophotometer (Tender)
Punjabi Lajmi da paper hataun da mamla (News)
FTIR Spectroscopy and Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography etc (Tender)
Punjabi virodi chehre wale VC nu turant hataya jave, Punjabi Manch (News)
Toh janab ko nahi chahiye Punjabi (News)
Varsity Cycling Championship (News)
Guru Nanak Dev University to have Satguru Ram Singh Chair (News)
Satguru Ram Singh Chair ke liye bajat jari (News)
Campus Notice (Profile)
Construction of various Buildings with in GNDU (Tender)
Construction of various Buildings with in GNDU Regional Campus (Tender)
Students told to vocate hostel (News)
Nilami Notice (Advertisement)
Providing installing commissioning and testing of main LT distribution panel (Tender)
Commisioning and testing of main LT distribution panel (Tender)
GNDU ki niyukti ki janch ho (News)
Capt demands probe into GNDU campus land row (News)
Campus wide Networking of GNDU Regional Campuses (Tender)
GNDU wallo Basti 9 di Jamin chadde jaan di janch hove (News)
GNDU ke zamin chodne ki janch ho (News)
VC Teachers dian manga mud vicharan layi tayar (News)
University ne Teachers diya manga prati udarta wali pohounch apnayi (News)
Dr Rajesh Kaliya ne Deputy Registrar da auhda sambhaleya (News)
GNDU Teachers continue strike (News)
Teachers hadtal par Office par dharna (News)
Teachers on hadtal (News)
Guru Nanak Dev ji Vare film banayegi Varsity (News)
15 lac to 3 lac Answer Books (Tender)
GNDU non teaching employes chunav 20 ko (News)
Director Librarian Deputy Librarian and Land Scape Officer (Job Vacancy)
Supply of TMT Steel (Tender)
Guru Nanak Varsity de Prof Bhalla ohde ton farag (News)
Supply of Answer Books (Tender)
Tender Notice for Construction of Lecture Theatre and etc (Tender)
Tender Notice for Construction and Electronics technology department (Tender)
GNDU ke VC ki suraksha bhadi (News)
BTech MBA and MCA (Admission Notice)
VC vallo Physics Block di 4th Manjil da udhghatan (News)
Post Graduate Paddar de Exam wich Semester Exam laggu (News)
BTech MCA and MBA etc (Admission Notice)
Campus Notice (Advertisement)
BTech MCA and MBA Course (Admission Notice)
GNDU ke 3 SDO nilambit (News)
PhD Programmes (Admission Notice)
M Tech Programme (Admission Notice)
Entrance test for MBA and MCA (Entrance Test)
Guru Nanak Dev varsity di Synidicate Meeting wich niyuktiya nu pravangi (News)
Guru Nanak Dev Varsity vallo Dalhoji wich Highking Treking camp (News)
25 and 30 Mbps leased line (Tender)
Supply of TMT Steel (Tender)
GNDU ne apne Campuses me chalte MA Courses ko kiya Hons (News)
Authorized and Certified bus body Builders (Tender)
Lecturers on Contract Basis (Job Vacancy)
University vallo PG Courses layi online form 7 toh (News)
Allotment of Canteens and Shops (Tender)
Construction of Room and Platform (Tender)
Bhagat Puran Singh nu khatam karan de faisle karan GND Varsity vivada wich ghiri (News)
Environmental awareness campaign and Decision hailed (Advertisement)
Proffesionalism ki taraf badhi GNDU (News)
GNDU first in Asia to start MD course in sports medicine (News)
Through College Planning Board ka Ghathan (News)
GNDU cancels examination centre at VMS College (News)
Tender Notice (Advertisement)
GNDU in top ten best Universities in World (Profile)
GNDU desh diya 10 vadiya Universities wich shamal (News)
Extruder and Rheometer (Tender)
Guru Nanak Dev University da 41ba sthapna Divas manaya (News)
GNDU enter 42nd year of existence (News)
University text book board nu sarthak banaoun di lod (News)
Canada de kosul wallo Guru Nanak Dev University da daura (News)
Entrance Tests in GNd Varsity go (News)
No Principals GNDU Colleg to pay fine (News)
Clerk CUM Junior and Data Entry Operator (Job Vacancy)
MCA and MBA etc (Admission Notice)
GNDU seek enhanced govt grant (News)
Shifting Cum 2nd Counselling Schedule ()
Guru Nanak Dev University Di Zameen Ch Bania Smadha tehan Lagiya (News)
5 Year and 3 Year and Law Courses (Admission Notice)
GNDU (News)
VC Hotel Khali Ka Deya farman (News)
Remploy principals after Retirement (Advertisement)
GNDU exempts religious studies fees (News)
Counselling for B Ed 2010 (Admission Notice)
MBA and MCA Programmes (Admission Notice)
GNDU demands Rs 60 cr bailout (News)
B Tech Degree Courses (Admission Notice)
MBA and MCA Courses (Entrance Test)
MSc in Nano Science (Admission Notice)
Construction of Boundary Wall and Supply of PPC cement etc (Tender)
Master Level Courses (Admission Notice)
Guru Granth Sahib Adhiain kender sathapit karn nu mili parvangi (News)
GNDU Amritsar (Profile)
Athletics Coach (Job Vacancy)
Govt has no right to start probe against me, Jai Rup (News)
M.A., M.Phil, MJMC, BALLB, LLB (Admission Notice)
M.Phil ,M.Tech. ,M.Sc. ,B.Tech. ,MBA , P.G. DIPLOMA ,LL.B. (Admission Notice)
Data Entry Operator and etc (Job Vacancy)
MBA and MCA Entrance test (Job Vacancy)
Waiting for the govt to wake up to its needs (News)
VC making appointments effective after his own retirement (News)
UGC project runs into rough weather (News)
Reaching out to jail inmates (News)
Message of Mr S P Singh and R S Bawa etc (Profile)
Bhagat Puran Chair at GNDU (News)
Now, satellite link for GNDU (News)
IAS PCS Examination (Entrance Test)
GNDU sets up new school of promise (News)
Accused of theft, GNDU student commits suicide (News)
Ban on Coldrinks (News)
MBA (Admission Notice)
Tender Notice for Contractors (Advertisement)
Tender Notice for Power Xray Notice (Advertisement)
MBA and MCA Entrance Test 2010 (Admission Notice)
Notice for the Date of Examinations (Advertisement)
PHGraduate and Post Graduate Programs etc (Admission Notice)
Compartment cases can seek Admission (News)
Profile (Profile)
Entrance Tests for MBA and MCA (Admission Notice)
Entrance Tests ()
UGC Chairman stresses against Education (News)
GNDU unfair in Promotions (News)
GNDU plans to increase working hrs for Lecturers (News)
Guru Nanak Dev University de darjan BEd Colleges da natija rokeya (News)
SC wants PMET result in two days (News)
Principals foreign trip raises controversy (News)
University ne Science de khetar wich Bharat diya Universities wicho 8 number prapat kitta (News)
Kuch readers ko Proffessors banaya (News)
Message of VC Dr A S Brar (Profile)
University ke rule regulation par bhari pda RTI act (Job Vacancy)
University ke rule regulation par bhari pda RTI act (News)
Campus Notes (Advertisement)
Supply of TMT Steel Fe 415 as per IS 1786 (Tender)
Students, lawyers should raise voice against injustice (News)
GNDU da khed sitara (News)
National seminar on teacher (News)
University da sathapna diwas 24 nu (News)
Answersheet no confidential information, Punjab CIC (News)
GNDU misguided High Court (News)
Conference of Hindi Language (News)
Old Punjab relived (Advertisement)

Media coverage of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU), Amritsar Punjab, Punjab

Summer Food Festival-University Industry Interaction 2012 in GNDU from May 19

AMRITSAR: Guru Nanak Dev University would organise a two-day Summer Food Festival-University Industry Interaction-2012 on May 19 and 20 in the the University. This festival would be organised by the Department of Food Science and Technology of the University.

In a release today, R Head of the Department.S.S. Kaler, said that this event would be open to the general public to enjoy the delicacy and cultural evenings during the festival. The detailed information regarding the summer food festival is available on the University website (www.gndu.ac.in) in the department profile.

Kaler said that the event would be a blend of technical presentations, exhibition stalls, cultural evenings and brain storming sessions. He said it would boost the University-Food Industry rapport and would provide a platform to share the current scenario of food processing in Punjab.

The industry would also get a platform to display the products, innovations, and expertise. The department would also share their expertise, facilities available and reorient the thrust areas of research as per the demand of the region. He said that the topics of the seminar are relevant to the present day needs of the sugar, alcohol, distillery, brewery and food processing industries.

The sponsoring industries of this event would be given the slot to present their profiles, share the innovations in the field. The industries would also be encouraged to have collaborations with the department to promote research, interaction and sharing the facilities available.

The related industries are therefore requested to participate in a big way to get benefit from the deliberations to be discussed at large.

Guru Nanak Dev University to give special concession to

Kashmiri Migrants in admissions Amritsar, April 30 (PTI) Guru Nanak Dev University Vice Chancellor A S Brar has decided to provide special concession to Kashmiri migrants seeking admission in technical and professional courses in the University from this academic session. The Syndicate of the University has already accorded their approval to it. GNDU Registrar Inderjit Singh, however, did not spell out what these concessions are. The concession would be given to the Kashmiri migrants who continue to face hardships, as per the instructions of Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, Govt. of India. said that in those technical-professional departments of the University campus and its regional campuses and constituent colleges where there is only one applicant from Kashmiri migrant community, admission may be granted if the candidate fulfills all the requirements and qualifications. He said that in case there is more than one candidate from Kasmiri migrants, the admission may be granted on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying exam as per rules of the University.

GNDUTA stands by lecturer

A day after a woman lecturer of English at Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) quit her job alleging harassment by an outsider, the GNDU Teachers Association (GNDUTA) came out in her support on Friday and asked the university authorities to intensify security on the campus. A meeting of the executive body of the association was held on Friday to discuss the issue. Later, in a press statement, GNDUTA president Balwinder Singh and secretary Lakhwinder Singh strongly condemned the incident and expressed serious concern over the lack of security on the campus.

The incident points to the vulnerability of women on the campus due to lack of security. Another such incident was brought on record by the executive, but had gone unnoticed. Two girl students had been attacked by a boy on March 19 and one of them suffered a fracture in the arm, the GNDUTA said in its statement.

The association criticised the university authorities for their inability to ensure the safety of GNDU women employees and girl students. The security officer, whose job is to ensure the safety of all university members, is indulging in all kinds of worthless activities instead of taking steps for the safety of the faculty and students, it said.Taking note of the statement of the dean, academic affairs in the media that she was busy attending several meetings and found no time to read the letter, the GNDUTA said that she was trying to evade a serious issue.

A letter which had been sent on March 16 to the office could not get the desired attention of the authorities till date. The dean, academic affairs says that the university authorities can do nothing about any incident which happens outside the campus, but this incident occurred in the planning department of the university, said the GNDUTA.

The statement further said that the university authorities were responsible for all incidents relating to and affecting the university members, both in and outside the campus.The GNDUTA executive appealed to the authorities to discard their insensitivities and take a serious note of this incident. GNDUTA representatives also demanded the immediate intervention of the vice-chancellor in the matter and demanded that he should persuade the lecturer to withdraw her resignation.

Hans Raj Hans joins GNDU as visiting fellow

Popular Sufi and folk singer Hans Raj Hans has joined the music department of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) as visiting fellow to impart and share his knowledge of music with the faculty and the students. Music has got a deep association with Gurbani and my appointment will help me share my knowledge of gurmat sangeet with the students and the faculty. I am honoured by this appointment, said Hans while addressing the media in the presence of vice-chancellor Prof AS Brar here on Monday.

Music department head Prof Gurpreet Kaur, who was also present, revealed that the appointment was made by the V-C on Sunday and Hans joined on the same day.I want my field to be looked at with academic respect. I will be in this university not solely as a teacher but also as a student, said Hans while going down memory lane and pointing out that he had participated in his first-ever university-level youth festival in GNDU when he was a student representing DAV College, Jalandhar. He had then sung famous Punjabi folk song Jugni, for which he won the first prize.

Brar said that GNDU would appoint eminent personalities from various fields as visiting professors in order to enhance the knowledge of students. He said the contribution of Hans was commendable in the field of music, especially Sufi singing.

Hans is already a life fellow of Punjabi University, Patiala and is also associated with a US-based university.
Prof Gurpreet Kaur said a student of the music department was doing her PhD on the personality of Hans.

Hans Raj Hans joins GNDU as visiting fellow

Popular Sufi and folk singer Hans Raj Hans has joined the music department of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) as visiting fellow to impart and share his knowledge of music with the faculty and the students. Music has got a deep association with Gurbani and my appointment will help me share my knowledge of gurmat sangeet with the students and the faculty. I am honoured by this appointment, said Hans while addressing the media in the presence of vice-chancellor Prof AS Brar here on Monday.

Music department head Prof Gurpreet Kaur, who was also present, revealed that the appointment was made by the V-C on Sunday and Hans joined on the same day.I want my field to be looked at with academic respect. I will be in this university not solely as a teacher but also as a student, said Hans while going down memory lane and pointing out that he had participated in his first-ever university-level youth festival in GNDU when he was a student representing DAV College, Jalandhar. He had then sung famous Punjabi folk song Jugni, for which he won the first prize.
Brar said that GNDU would appoint eminent personalities from various fields as visiting professors in order to enhance the knowledge of students. He said the contribution of Hans was commendable in the field of music, especially Sufi singing.

Hans is already a life fellow of Punjabi University, Patiala and is also associated with a US-based university.
Prof Gurpreet Kaur said a student of the music department was doing her PhD on the personality of Hans.

International Guru Nanak Dev university to come up in Pak

Punjab: Pak man with bullets held at Amritsar airport Share Fake Indian notes seized in Amritsar Share Father-son commit suicide in Amritsar Share Amritsar: Pakistan Evacuee Trust Property Board, which look after affairs related to Sikh and Hindu communities in that country, today said it will soon set up International Guru Nanak Dev university.
The university will come up at Nankana Sahib in Pakistan, PETPB chairman Sayid Asif Akhtar Hashmi said here after visiting the Golden Temple.Hashmi, who was leading a six-member team, was on a day-long tour to the city to visit the Golden Temple. Governing council members of the university would also comprised of Indian members, particularly from Sikh bodies like SGPC Amritsar and Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee, he said.The choice of Nankana Sahib was made as it was the birth place of founder of Sikhism Guru Nanak Dev, Hashmi said, adding that the university would be an autonomous body and Pakistan government wouldn't interfere in its functioning. It would run from the income of gurudwaras based in Pakistan, he said.

Amanveer Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH, Ph. No. 0172-4630054

Amanveer Singh
care of S. S. Sadana,
Opp. B. D. S. Colony, Inside Chhatiwind Gate,
Amritsar - 143001 -Complainant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar 143006 -Respondent
CC No. 2549 of 2011

ORDER
Present : Mr. Amanveer Singh, Complainant, in person.
Mr. Mohinder Singh, Asstt. Registrar, for the Respondent.

Heard via Video Conference.

2. As S.I.C. - Mr BC Thakur - has taken leave for today i. e. 23.09.2011, the C.I.C. vide his order dated 21.09.2011 has said that cases fixed for hearing today will be heard only by single bench of the undersigned.

3. The RTI request is dated 30.06.2011 and the information demanded is on 08 points which are in the nature of questions and questions do not constitute - information - as defined under section 2f of the RTI Act, 2005. On not getting any response, a complaint was filed with the commission on 12.08.2011.

4. The Respondent vide his letter dated 13.09.2011, addressed to the commission, has given the complete detailed information to the complainant and photo copies of University Calendar Volume 1 and other relevant documents which adequately answers the information sought by the Complainant by way of questions.

5. The response of the PIO is on record, which the complainant acknowledges having received.

Since, the information stands supplied, the case is disposed of and closed.

Announced in the hearing.
Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Place: Chandigarh. (P. P. S. Gill)
Dated: 23.09.2011. State Information Commissioner

Jaswant Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO NO. 32-33-34, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH

Sh. Jaswant Singh
s/o Sh. Tarlok Singh
835/2, Chandigarh Road,
Khanna (Distt. Ludhiana).
…Appellant
Versus

1. Public Information Officer
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University
Amritsar
2. Public Information Officer,
First Appellate Authority,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
…Respondents

AC - 364/11
Order

Present:
None for the appellant.
For the Respondent: S/Sh. Varinder Singh and Balwinder Singh.

Heard via Video Conference.

The present appeal had been filed before the Commission on 05.04.2011 by Sh. Jaswant Singh under the RTI Act, 2005.

A communication dated 11.07.2011 has been received from the appellant stating that due to change in the circumstances, he does not want to continue with the appeal and hence withdraws the same.

Respondents present informed the Commission that they had already supplied the relevant information to the appellant on 11.07.2011.

Seeing the merits of the case, it is hereby closed and disposed of.

Copies of order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-
Chandigarh Mrs. Ravi Singh
Dated: 18.08.2011 State Information Commissioner

After UP, Punjab bans screening of Aarakshan

Chandigarh: After UP, the Punjab government has also imposed a ban on the release of Prakash Jhas controversial Hindi film Aarakshan(Reservation) in the state following apprehensions that some scenes and dialogues may trigger trouble.The Shiromani Akali Dal-BJP government said the ban will remain in force till screening committee constituted by the state previews the movie and submits its report.

The decision to ban the Amitabh Bachchan-Saif Ali Khan starrer was taken after receiving intelligence reports that Aarakhshan has certain scenes-dialogues which may inflame the passion of some communities in Punjab, an official spokesman said today.Yesterday, the Mayawati government had banned the film in UP for two months on the grounds that it could create law and order problem in the state. (Read: No Aarakshan in Mayawatis UP) .The decision to ban the film which is due to hit the screens on Friday was taken following a recommendation by a high level official committee set up by the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) government.

The main theme of the movie is about commercialisation of education followed by several objectionable dialogues against people from backward communities. There is no discussion on reservation in its second half. We have asked the Censor Board to make necessary changes in it, National
The Punjab government has constituted a seven-member committee consisting of Samir Kumar, IAS, Secretary Home, Raj Kumar Atihai, Chairman Safai Karamchari Board, Punjab and Vijay Danav, Chairman, Scheduled Caste Welfare Board and a member of the Punjab Scheduled Caste Commission.

Others on the Committee will be V K Bhawra, Inspector General, Intelligence, Vice Chancellor Punjabi University, Patiala and Vice Chancellor Guru Nanak Dev University Amritsar.
The Committee will give its report tomorrow after viewing the film, the official said.A nine-member team of the Censor Board had given a U-A certificate to the film without any cuts.

Jaswant Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh

Sh. Jaswant Singh s/o Shri Tarlok Singh
R/o 835/2, Chandigarh Road, Khanna,
District: Luidhiana. --------Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
FAA: -do-
-------Respondent

AC No.374 of 2011
ORDER

Present: - None on behalf of the Appellant.
Shri Inderjit Singh, PIO-cum-Registrar, on behalf of Respondent.

Appellant preferred second appeal with the Commission on 7.4.2011 with respect to his RTI application dated 22.12.2010 to the PIO, O/o the Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. This appeal is taken today in his absence.

2. Respondent appeared and submitted a letter bearing No.1183/R, dated 27.7.2011 in the Court in which it has been stated by the appellant that due to change in circumstances, he dos not want to continue the appeal and withdraw the same.

3. In view the above, the case is hereby closed and disposed of.

4. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-
Chandigarh (Mrs. Jaspal Kaur) Dated: 28.07.2011 State Information Commissioner.

Lakhvir Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB.
SCO NO. 84-85,SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Lakhvir Singh, Advocate,
Chamber No.852, 8th Floor,
Lawyers’ Chamber Complex,
District Couirts, Ludhiana.
--------Complainant
Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
(ii) FAA: -do-
-------Respondent

AC-375/2011
ORDER

Present: - None on behalf of the Appellant..
Shri Inderjit Singh, PIO-cum-Registrar on behalf of the Respondent.

Appellant preferred second appeal with the Commission on 7.4.2011 with respect to his RTI application dated 16.12.2010 to the PIO, O/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, regarding copies of all degrees & detail marks of Graduation, LL.B., LL.M & Phd of Shri Bimaldeep Singh, Lecturer, Department of Law.

2. Respondent submitted that information has been supplied to the appellant regarding point No.2 and regarding point No.1, respondent denied in view of section 8(1)(j).

3. Appellant is not present today. He had due and adequate notice of hearing to be held today through registered post on 2.6.2011, but he has chosen not to appear himself or through representative nor has he sent any communication. Also neither has he explained what public interest is involved in seeking the third party information nor has he sent any written arguments in this behalf.

4. In view of the above, the case is hereby closed and disposed of.

5. Copies of the order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-
Chandigarh (Mrs. Jaspal Kaur) Dated: 28.07.2011 State Information Commissioner.

Surinder Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH, Ph. No. 0172-4630054
Visit us @ www.infocommpunjab.com

Surinder Singh
M/s Vir Builder,
56, East Mohan Nagar,
Amritsar ..…Complainant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar ,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar
..…Respondent
CC No. 1736 of 2011
ORDER

Present:
Mr. Surinder Singh, the Complainant, in person.
Mr. Mohinder Singh, Asstt. Registrar, for the Respondent.
_______

Heard via Video Conference.

2. The RTI request, is dated 28.05.2010, addressed to PIO-cum-Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. The information demanded pertains to copies of official records relating an individual, J. E. for the past 10 years ending 31.03.2010. The complaint with the Commission is dated 04.06.2011.

3. The Respondent says voluminous information running into 5455 sheets has been provided to the Complainant on 08.07.2011.

4. The Complainant now says that he wishes to withdraw his case and that written-request in this regard has since been sent to Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.
In view of this, the case is disposed of and closed.
Announced in the hearing.
Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Place: Chandigarh (P. P. S. Gill)
Dated: 13.07.2011 State Information Commissioner.

Jaswant Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO NO. 32-33-34, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH

Sh. Jaswant Singh
s/o Sh. Tarlok Singh
835/2, Chandigarh Road,
Khanna (Distt. Ludhiana). …Appellant

Versus

1. Public Information Officer
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University
Amritsar
2. Public Information Officer,
First Appellate Authority,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar …Respondents

AC - 364/11
Order

Present: None for the parties.
Heard via Video Conference.

Vide application dated 16.12.2010, Sh. Jaswant Singh sought the following information from the respondent:

“i) Copies of all attendance register of all subject of semester IIIrd (LL.B III years) w.e.f. the start of IIIrd semester till completed i.e. subject & name of professors are these:

a) Administrative Law (Sh. Vimaldeep Singh)
b) IPC (Sh. Ravinder Pal Singh)
c) Transfer of Property Act (Ms. Gunisha)
d) Labour Law (Ms. Rachna Arora))
e) Public Interest Litigation (Smt. Sukhbir Kaur &
Smt. Mamta)
ii) Copies of all orders / proceedings, whereby withheld the Roll Number of applicant & others of LL.B IIIrd semester and provide reasons, How many members, attended the meetings, their names & designations, date of all meetings, minutes of all meetings, results of all meetings.

iii) Names of all members of Committee, those withheld the Roll Number of applicant & others.

iv) Reasons / Grounds for withheld the Roll Number of applicant & others.

v) When, How & by whom brought to the notice of Vice Chancellor regarding the withheld or Roll Number of applicant & others.

vi) Whether every month intimated the student regarding their short lectures. If so, method of intimation & copy of method/list of names.

vii) How many lectures given to applicant regarding his duty performed in Youth Festival, if not, given any lecture provide reasons.”

As the information provided vide letter dated 03.02.2011 was not found to be satisfactory, the first appeal was preferred before the First Appellate Authority on 15.02.2011. Terming the response from the appellate authority dated 14.03.2011 as wrong, the present second appeal has been filed before the Commission on 05.04.2011.

Today neither the appellant nor the respondent is present nor has any communication been received from either of the two.

One more opportunity is granted to the respondent to provide complete and relevant information to the appellant, under intimation to the Commission, within two weeks.

The case will be heard through Video Conference Facility of NIC available in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar, on 18.08.2011 at 11 A.M.

Copies of order be sent to the parties.

Sd/-
Chandigarh Mrs. Ravi Singh
Dated: 29.06.2011 State Information Commissioner

B.Ed admissions to go online in four universities

Chandigarh: Soon, online admissions for B.Ed course will be held in Panjab University and all affiliated colleges of three other universities of Punjab state.

From this year onwards, no entrance examination will be held for students to get into colleges running B.Ed course. The students will get the privilege to get into the esteemed universities on the basis of merit.

The notification regarding this will be issued to Guru Nanak Dev University (Amritsar), Panjab University (Patiala) and to all B.Ed colleges affiliated to Lovely Professional University in the first week of July.

B.Ed Joint Admission Co-ordinator and Chairperson Dr Nandita said the counselling process for the course will begin from August first week.

For further information, students can log on to the official website of Panjab University.

Gurbax Singh Bains versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Gurbax Singh Bains, #206,
Phase-6, Mohali-160056. -------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Registrar, Thapar University, Patiala.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 776 of 2011

Present:-
Shri Gurbax Singh Bains complainant in person.
None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

None has appeared on behalf of the respondent-PIO. The information-seeker states that information has also not been furnished so far. The case is adjourned to 11.5.2011 at 10.30 A.M. The respondent may file his written reply and also appear on that date.

(R.I. Singh)
April 29, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Christian United Front protests exams on Easter, Good Friday

Ludhiana: Christian United Front has strongly objected the scheduling of examinations on Easter and Good Friday.The front staged demonstrations against Punjab University (PU), Punjabi University and Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU). The protesters said all the three varsities have scheduled their examinations on the very important festive occasions of the Christian community. They even threatened to open convent schools and colleges on the festive occasions of other religions if the exam dates were not changed.April 22 and April 24 are Good Friday and Easter respectively and the three varsities have scheduled their exams on these very dates. GNDU has the exams of biotechnology, clinical beautician, microbiology, jewelery design, computer maintenance and other courses.The protestors also said all the three varsities have scheduled their exams ofr April 22. PU and Punjabi University have the examinations of elective languages on April 22.PU officers, however, said there is no exam scheduled for April 22. They also said the exam would have been postponed if it was ever scheduled on the day due to some mistake.

Examination Controller of Punjabi University Pawan Singla said the students of his varsity even wrote exams on Ramnavami. He further said the varsity does not allow holiday for the teachers on April 22 so the exam has been scheduled for the date. There was no intention too hurt any religious sentiment, he added.General Secretary of Christian United Front Agustin Das said GNDU has refused to postpone the exams arguing that the Christian students in the varsity are few in number. Das said such an attitude is wrong and will not be tolerated.

AMARDEEP SINGH Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and ORS CWP 5023 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


Date of decision : 21.3.2011

Amardeep Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and Ors. ...Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present : Mr.S.K.Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

MAHESH GROVER, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the instant writ petition. Permitted to do so.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE

GNDU exams for UG classes from March 18

The annual examinations of under-graduate classes at Guru Nanak Dev University will start from March 18, 2011. More than 1.5 lakh student are appearing in the examinations. According to Professor In-Charge (Examinations) Dr R K Bedi, all necessary arrangements had been made and supervisory staff appointed to check the menace of copying at all 300 centres.


HARLEEN SINGH Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER CWP 4666 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


Date of decision : 16.3.2011

Harleen Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another ...Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present :
Mr.H.S.Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner.

MAHESH GROVER, J.
The facts of the case reveal that the petitioner, who had taken admission in the engineering course in 2003, was required to complete the same upto 2009. He, however, abandoned the course midstream and pursued another course for obtaining a commercial pilot's licence. In 2010 he approached the respondents to permit him to complete the course by picking the threads from 7th semester
onward. The prayer has been declined by observing that the course was to be completed within six years and since a period of more than six years has elapsed, the petitioner cannot be permitted to continue with the course.

After arguing for some time on the lines of the aforesaid grievance, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to approach the respondents to persuade them to permit him to complete the course by joining the course from 7th semester onward. The petition is disposed of as having been withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the
respondents for redressal of his grievance. In such an eventuality, the respondents will take into consideration the entire facts, which have been detailed in the petition, to answer sympathetically the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE

Ajit Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Ajit Singh s/o Shri Harnam Singh,
#5, Gumtala Colony, Amritsar.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 51 of 2011

Present:- Shri Ajit Singh complainant in person.

None on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

The respondent has submitted a written reply received in the Commission vide diary No.4239 dated 15.3.2011. A copy of this has also been sent to the complainant. A perusal of the reply submitted by the University shows that after giving due notice to the third party, copies of discharge books of Mr. Dildar Masih and Mr. Sucha Singh have been furnished to the complainant.

2. The complainant who has appeared today confirms that he has received the information free of cost to his satisfaction.

3. In view of the above, the complaint case is closed.

(R.I. Singh)
March 15, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

SATBIR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER CWP 1167 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.


DATE OF DECISION : 3.3.2011

Satbir Singh and others PETITIONERS
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University and another RESPONDENTS

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present:-
Shri Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Amrit Paul, Advocate for respondent-1.
Shri Salil Sagar, Additional A.G. Punjab for respondent-2.

MAHESH GROVER, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has repeatedly stated that the earlier writ petition was withdrawn with a specific permission given by this Court enabling the petitioners to withdraw the civil suit, so that they could file the instant petition. Nothing is borne out from the earlier order to this effect. It is apparently an attempt to over-reach the Court.

Shri Sachdeva has tried to explain the lapse on his part by saying that it was a bona fide error. The Court is not convinced with the explanation given by the learned counsel for the petitioners for the simple reason that the order by which the petition was permitted to be withdrawn, was withheld from this Court.

Secondly, it was repeatedly sought to be projected before this Court that the Court had granted the permission to withdraw the civil suit enabling the petitioners to file the instant petition. None of these are borne out from the record. It is thus a clear reflection on the part of the petitioners who have made a misleading statement before this Court. It is settled law that a person who does not come to the Court with clean hands, does not deserve any indulgence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in amjas Foundation and another v. Union of India and others 2011(1) R.C.R.

(Civil) 176, observed as follows :-

14. The principle that a person who does not come to the Court with clean hands is not entitled to be heard on the merits of his grievance and, in any case, such person is not entitled to any relief is applicable not only to the petitions filed under Articles 32, 226 and 136 of the Constitution but also to the cases instituted in other courts and judicial forums.

The object underlying the principle is that every Court is not only entitled but is duty bound to protect itself from unscrupulous litigants who do not have any respect for truth and who try to pollute the stream of justice by resorting to falsehood or by making
misstatement or by suppressing facts which have bearing on adjudication of the issue(s) arising in the case. In Dalgesh v. Jarvie 2 Mac. and G.231, 238, Lord Langdale and Rolfe B. observed : “It is the duty of a party asking for an injunction to bring under the notice of the Court all facts material to the determination of his right to that injunction ; and it is no
excuse for him to say that he was not aware of the importance of any fact which he has omitted to bring forward. In Castelli v. Cook (1849) 7 Hare 89, 94 Wigram V.C. stated the rule in the following words : “A plaintiff applying ex parte comes under a contract with the Court that he will state the whole case fully and fairly to the Court. If he fails to do that, and the Court finds, when other party applies to dissolve the injunction, that any material fact has been suppressed or not properly brought forward, the plaintiff is told the Court will not decide on the merits, and that, as he has broken faith with the Court, the injunction must go. In Republic of Poeru v. Dreyfus Brothers and Company, 55 L.T. 802, 803, Kay J. held as under :

I have always maintained, and I think it most important to maintain most strictly, the rule that, in ex parte applications to this Court, the utmost good faith must be observed. If there is an important misstatement, speaking for myself, I have never hesitated, and never shall hesitate until the rule is altered, to discharge the order at once, so as to impress upon all persons who are suitors in this Court the importance of dealing in good faith in the Court when ex parte applications are made.

The same rule was restated by Scrutton L., J in R.V.Kensington Income Tax Commissioner (1917) 1 K.B. 486. The facts of that case were that in April, 1916, the
General Commissioners for the Purposes of the Income Tax Acts for the district of Kensgington made an additional assessment upon the applicant for the year ending April 5, 1913, in respect of profits arising from foreign possessions.

On May 16, 1916, the applicant obtained a rule nisi directed to the Commissioners calling upon them to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not be awarded to prohibit them from preceding upon the ground that the applicant was not a subject of the King nor resident within the United Kingdom and had not been in the United Kingdom, except for
temporary purposes, nor with any view or intent of establishing her residence therein, nor for a period equal to six months in any one year. In the affidavit on which the rule was obtained the applicant stated that she was a French subject and resident in France and was not and had not been a subject of the United Kingdom nor a resident in the United
Kingdom ; that during the year ending April, 5, 1993, she was in the United Kingdom for temporary purposes on visits for sixty-eight days ; that she spent about twenty of these days in London at her brother's house, 213, King's Road, Chelsea, generally in company with other guests of her brother ; that she was also in the United Kingdom during the year ending April 5, 1914, for temporary purposes on visits, and spent part of the time at 213, King's Road aforesaid ; and that since the month of November, 1914, she had not been in the United Kingdom. From the affidavits filed on behalf of the Commissioners and of the surveyor of taxes, who showed cause against the rule nisi, and from the affidavit of the
applicant in reply, it appeared that in February, 1909, a leasehold house, 213, King's Road, Chelsea had been taken in the name of the applicant's brother. The purchase-money for the lease of the house and the furniture amounted to 4000, and this was paid by the applicant out of her own money. The accounts of household expenses were paid by the brother and subsequently adjusted between him and the applicant. The Divisional Court without dealing with the merits of the case discharged the rule on the ground that the applicant had suppressed or misrepresented the facts material to her application. The Divisional Court observed that the Court, for its own protection is entitled to say “we refuse this writ of prohibition without going into the merits of the case on the ground of the conduct of the applicant in bringing the case before us.” On appeal, Lord Cozens-Hardy M.R. and Warrington L.J. approved the view taken by the Divisional Court. Scrutton, L.J. who agreed that the appeal should be dismissed observed :

and it has been for many years the rule of the Court, and one which it is of the greatest importance to maintain, that when an applicant comes to the Court to obtain relief on an ex parte statement he should make a full and fair disclosure of all the material facts - facts, not law. He must not misstate the law if he can help it - the Court is supposed to know the law. But it knows nothing about the facts, and the applicant must state fully and fairly the facts, and the penalty by which the Court enforces that obligation is that if it finds out that the facts have not been fully and fairly stated to it, the Court will set aside any action which it has taken on the faith of the imperfect statement.

15. The above noted rules have been applied by this Court in large number of cases for declining relief to a party whose conduct is blameworthy and who has not approached the
Court with clean hands - Hari Narain v. Badri Das, AIR 1963 SC 1558, Welcome Hotel v. State of A.P., (1983) 4 SCC 575, G.Narayanswamy Reddy v. Government of
Karnataka, (1991) 3 SCC 261, S.P.Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, 1994(1) R.R.R. 253 : (1994) 1 SCC 1, A.V.Papayya Sastry v. Government of A.P., 2007(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 431 : 2007(2) R.A.J. 451 : (2007) 4 SCC 221, Prestige Lights Limited v. SBI, 2007(4) R.C.R. (Civil) 46 : 2007(4) R.A.J. 642 : (2007) 8 SCC 449, Sunil Poddar
v. Union Bank of India, 2008(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 555 : (2008) 2 SCC 326, K.D.Sharma v. SAIL, (2008) 12 SCC 481, G.Jayashree v. Bhagwandas S.Patel, (2009) 3 SCC 141
and Dalip Singh v. State of U.P., (2010) 2 SCC 114). In the last mentioned judgment, the Court lamented on the increase in the number of cases in which the parties have tried
to misuse the process of Court by making false and/or misleading statements or by suppressing the relevant facts or by trying to mislead the Court in passing order in their favour and observed :

For many centuries Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e. “satya” (truth) and “ahimsa” (nonviolence).

Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral part of the justice-delivery system which was in vogue in the pre- Independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences.

Howsoever, post-Independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system.

The materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings.

In the last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this
new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.

Even if this fact is to be ignored, the petitioners had earlier filed a civil suit wherein the interim directions were given and the question of the admission of the petitioners, as also the permission granted to them to appear in the examination in question was made subject to the rights of the University to establish their eligibility condition implying thereby that the issue which has been raised herein, was directly in question in the matter pending before the Civil Court.

The petitioners having withdrawn the suit without seeking permission or liberty to file another petition, are clearly debarred from filing the instant petition.

Dismissed.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE

NARINDER KAUR Vs GNDU and ANR CWP No.4184 of 2011


HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 09.03.2011

Narinder Kaur . . . . Petitioner
VS.
GNDU and Anr. . . . . Respondents

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:
Mr. HS Brar, Advocate for the petitioner

SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)
(1). The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.02.2011 (Annexure P8) whereby she has been dismissed from service on the basis of a departmental enquiry.

(2). It does not appear to be in dispute that the above-stated order is appealable before the Syndicate of the University.

(3). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to submit her appeal within a period two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The Appellate Authority is directed to decide the said appeal preferably after giving her an opportunity of personal hearing and by passing a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of its submission.

(4). The petitioner shall be entitled to raise all her pleas taken before this Court which shall be dealt with by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law and also keeping in view the order dated 20.09.2010 passed by this Court in CWP No.995 of 2010 titled as Dr. Balwinder Singh v. Guru Nank Dev University, Amritsar.

(5). Till then, the dispossession of the petitioner from the residential quarter allotted by the University shall remain stayed.

(6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti.

(S u r y a K a n t)
Judge

NARINDER KAUR Vs GNDU and ANR


HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 09.03.2011

Narinder Kaur . . . . Petitioner
VS.
GNDU and Anr. . . . . Respondents

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:
Mr. HS Brar, Advocate for the petitioner

SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)
(1). The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.02.2011 (Annexure P8) whereby she has been dismissed from service on the basis of a departmental enquiry.

(2). It does not appear to be in dispute that the above-stated order is appealable before the Syndicate of the University.

(3). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to submit her appeal within a period two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The Appellate Authority is directed to decide the said appeal preferably after giving her an opportunity of personal hearing and by passing a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of its submission.

(4). The petitioner shall be entitled to raise all her pleas taken before this Court which shall be dealt with by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law and also keeping in view the order dated 20.09.2010 passed by this Court in CWP No.995 of 2010 titled as Dr. Balwinder Singh v. Guru Nank Dev University, Amritsar.

(5). Till then, the dispossession of the petitioner from the residential quarter allotted by the University shall remain stayed.

(6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti.

(S u r y a K a n t)
Judge

KARAN Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER CWP 4235 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


Date of decision : 9.3.2011

Karan ....Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University and another ...Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present :
Mr.Jaspal Singh Maanipur, Advocate for the petitioner.

MAHESH GROVER, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the instant petition. Permitted to do so.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE

Ms Muskaan versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Muskaan d/o Shri Karam Chand, #160/15-2,
Bansal Colony, Sirsa (Haryana). -------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. -------------Respondent.

CC No. 3827 of 2010

Present:- None on behalf of the complainant.
Shri Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
The complainant had sought information pertaining to refund of Rs.900/- said to have been deposited with the University in the year 2006 as Security Amount. The respondent-University has explained the position that this amount of Rs.900/- was towards the dues of Hostel Mess Charges which are non-refundable. However, an amount of Rs.2000/- deposited as Mess Security, which was refundable, has been sent to the information-seeker vide Cheque No.213707 dated 15.2.2011 by post.

2. The complainant is absent without intimation. In view of the fact that the information stands furnished to the complainant, the case is closed.

(R.I. Singh)
February 28, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Ajit Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Ajit Singh s/o Shri Harnam Singh,
#5, Gumtala Colony, Amritsar. -------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. ------------- Respondent.

CC No. 51 of 2011

Present:-

Shri Ajit Singh complainant in person.
Shri Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

The main plea of the complainant is that he has been treated unequally in the matter of pension. While two other individuals who were also ex-B.S.F. employees rehired by the University are drawing higher pension from the University, he is being paid less. Therefore, he wants to know the reasons and also obtain copies of the relevant record.

2. The plea of the University is that this is personal information of two other employees and therefore protected under Section 8(i)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

3. I have heard the parties. Protection of personal information should not result in-a discriminatory treatment to similarly placed individuals in public service. The record of the two other individuals may be personal information, but it is in the custody of the public authority and relates to public employment. The plea of Section 8(i)(j) should not violate equality of similararly placed individuals in public service.

4. It is therefore directed that the University should furnish copies of the record in its custody free of cost to the complainant. If the Discharge Books of Shri Sucha Singh s/o Shri Chanan Singh and Shri Didar Masih are not available in the record, let a fresh effort be made to trace the same and if these remain untraced, let the University confirm it in writing.

5. To come up on 15.3.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
February 25, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

MEHAR SINGH SOKHI Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER Date of Decision: 24022011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

LPA 1817 of 2010

Date of Decision: 24022011

Mehar Singh Sokhi Appellant
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University and another Respondents

CORAM:
HON BLE MR JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI CHIEF JUSTICE
HON BLE MR JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3 Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present :
Mr MKDogra Advocate for the appellant

RANJAN GOGOI CJ(Oral)
CM No 5455-5456 of 2010
On due consideration of the grounds on which the condonation has been prayed for and upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties delay of 96 days in filing and 148 days in refiling the present appeal is condoned

Applications stand disposed of LPA No 1817 of 2010 This appeal is filed against an order dated 23112009 allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent-Management and setting aside the award of the Industrial Court which was one of reinstatement

Initial appointment of the petitioner which was on adhoc basis and for a period of six months was extended from time to time until the University took a decision not to extend the same any further Accordingly the petitioner stood relieved wef 8101990

This was communicated to the petitioner by a letter dated 11101990 (Annexure P-5)

Learned Single Judge took the view that the present is a case where the appellant was relieved on completion of the tenure of his appointment Therefore according to the learned Single Judge discontinuance of the service of the appellant-writ petitioner did not amount to retrenchment within the meaning of said expression as appearing in the Industrial Disputes Act The learned Single Judge also took note of the basis on which the discontinuance of service was
challenged by the appellant namely that he was given no opportunity to explain that the certificate-diploma obtained by him from the Christian Medical Association was otherwise acceptable and valid In considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter the learned Single Judge recorded the view that the said question was an incidental one and the same was not the basis for a decision to discontinue the services of the petitioner

From the document enclosed as Annexure P-5 it clearly
transpires that discontinuance of the service of the petitioner followed completion of his fixed tenure of service The authenticity-validity of the certificate-diploma was not taken into account by the University while deciding not to grant any further extension of service to the appellant If that be so the said discontinuance will not amount to retrenchment and the issue with regard to the validity of the certificate-diploma was not the foundation of the decision to discontinue the service of the appellant

Learned counsel for the for the appellant has urged that in the writ petition filed the Management had sought to justify its stand that the certificate-diploma of the appellant was not authorized

Therefore according to the learned counsel; the said issue was taken into account while deciding on the extension of the appellant s service

We disagree with the learned counsel The written statement filed by the Management before the learned Labour Court
clearly indicates that the workman was relieved after the term of his service had expired It was the specific case of the Management that the present is a case of non-renewal of the service tenure The pleadings in the writ petition with regard to the certificate-diploma has therefore to be understood to be qua the findings arrived at by the learned Labour Court on this score without the same being the case-defence of the Management

For the aforesaid reasons we do not find any merit in this
appeal to warrant admission thereof Appeal therefore is dismissed

(RANJAN GOGOI)
CHIEF JUSTICE

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
JUDGE

Guru Nanak Dev University CWP No.7908 of 2010 (O AND M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.7908 of 2010 (O AND M)

Decided on : 22-02-2011

Ravitesh Inderjit Singh ....Petitioner
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University and others ....Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present:-
Mr. Surinder Thakur, Advocate for
Mr. D.S.Pheruman, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate for respondents

MAHESH GROVER, J
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the instant petition has been rendered infructuous and the same may be disposed of as such.

Ordered accordingly.

(Mahesh Grover)
Judge

DR HARBHAJAN SINGH Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND OTHERS L P A 112 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


Date of Decision : February 10, 2011

Dr. Harbhajan Singh ….Appellant
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others …. Respondents

CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

Present :
Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. J.S. Puri, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No. 2 and 3.

1. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

M.M. KUMAR, J.
The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment dated 7.1.2008 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that a senior employee, like the appellant, working in the same cadre discharging similar duties cannot be given lesser pay than his junior unless there are some cogent reasons for such a course of action. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed and the order dated 27.7.1998 (P.9) adversely affecting the petitioner-appellant was set aside.

According to the aforesaid order, the representation filed by the petitioner-appellant dated 4.2.1997 was rejected in which claim was made for stepping up his pay equivalent to his junior Jasbir Singh, who was granted selection grade as Private Secretary. It has come on record that the petitioner-appellant had retired on 31.5.1991 and the writ petition was filed by him on 17.12.2001. The writ petition having been allowed, he has approached the Letters Patent Bench with a limited prayer for grant of interest on the delayed payment of arrears of pay and pension.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and find that the claim of interest made by the petitioner-appellant cannot be accepted because it is conceded as a fact that selection grade to Superintendents was granted on 23.6.1989 w.e.f. 7.7.1976.

In that regard he made a request to the University- authorities on 25.2.1991 (P.3), which was repeated on 14.7.1995 (P.4), 17.7.1996 (P.5), 16.6.1997 (P.6), 12.10.1997 and 26.6.1998 (P.8). However, his claim was rejected on 27.7.1998.

Eventually, a legal notice through his counsel was sent by the petitioner-appellant on 5.2.2000 (P.13) followed by another representation on 5.3.2001 (P.14). The writ petition was filed in December 2001, which has been now allowed on 7.1.2008 and no interest has been awarded.

Mr. Namit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitionerappellant has argued that in cases where there is delay in making payment of retiral benefits, interest is ordinarily awarded and the petitioner-appellant is entitled to the award of interest.

According to learned counsel, the petitioner-appellant has been paid arrears of salary from 23.6.1989 to 31.5.1991 amounting to Rs.20,969/- and arrears of pension from 1.6.1991 to 31.7.2008 amounting to Rs.1,26,197/-. The aforesaid payment has been made in pursuance of direction issued by the learned Single Judge.

According to the learned counsel, the aforesaid payment was liable to be made in 1989 when the decision was taken by the Syndicate (P.1).

The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant have been opposed by the counsel for the respondent, who had argued that the petitioner-appellant would not be entitled to the benefit of any interest because the delay is on the part of the petitioner-appellant who had resorted to the method of making representation after representation.

There is considerable delay in approaching this Court.

According to the learned counsel, the petitionerappellant has retired on 31.5.1991 and the writ petition was filed in December 2001 after more than ten years. Therefore, no interest is payable to the petitioner-appellant.

Having heard learned counsel, we are of the considered view that the claim of the petitioner-appellant for interest is devoid of any merit because if there was any error in fixation of his salary on account of refusal to grant the benefit of selection grade in the year 1989, then he should have approached the Court without any delay. It has come on record that the benefit of selection grade as Superintendent might have been admissible to him as person junior to him was granted the aforesaid benefit in pursuance of decision of the Syndicate dated 23.6.1989 (P.1). However, it was not clear whether his case would be covered because he has served as Superintendent in Panjab University and was taken to respondent-Guru Nanak Dev University as Assistant Registrar on 23.4.1973. In para 2 of the written statement filed by Deputy Controller (Local Audit) of the respondent-University, it has been pointed out that the Syndicate while sanctioning selection grade to the petitioner-appellant had also decided that before implementation of the decision regarding grant of selection grade to 20% of the posts, the Vice Chancellor may have to see that any Assistant Registrar, who had been promoted/appointed before 7.7.2006 is not adversely affected. As per the decision of the Syndicate, selection grade was given to Superintendents and Personal Assistants, which was approved by the Audit. However, no action was taken by the Vice-Chancellor because no anomaly was found in the pay of Assistant Registrar nor any such anomaly was pointed out by the petitioner-appellant at that time. It was not to become the basis for the Vice Chancellor to act because the petitioner-appellant was promoted as Assistant Registrar on 23.4.1973.

However, the Vice Chancellor on 10.4.1996 refixed the pay of the petitioner-appellant w.e.f. 22.11.1976 at par with his immediate senior Assistant Registrar Jasbir Singh, who was promoted as such on that date. After fixation of pay, the matter was put up before the audit, which raised objection.

Accordingly, the Audit observed that there was no anomaly regarding the pay fixation of the petitioner-appellant. The issue was vacillating in nature and there was no clear answer as the resolution dated 23.6.1989 passed by the Syndicate granted the benefit of selection grade w.e.f. 7.7.1976 confining it to eligible Superintendent to the extent of 20% of the posts. The petitioner-appellant was already promoted as Assistant Registrar w.e.f. 23.4.1973 and the respondent eventually decided in favour of the petitioner-appellant. Therefore, it cannot be said that it was a case of any intentional delay because the benefits emerging from the resolution of the Syndicate dated 23.6.1989 was not clearly stipulated.

Moreover, the petitioner-appellant also kept in making representations for a period of over ten years and approached this Court only in December 2001. Therefore, no case for grant of interest is made out and the judgment of the Full Bench rendered in the case of R.S. Randhawa V. State of Punjab, 1997 (3) RSJ 318 would not apply because interest would be awarded only in cases where there is no justifiable reason for the delay. As stated above, the respondent were not unjustified in sorting out the right of the petitioner-appellant and the petitioner-appellant is also responsible for delay and latches.

Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.

( M.M. KUMAR )
JUDGE

( T.P.S. MANN )
JUDGE

Ms Muskaan versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION,
PUNJABSCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
Ms. Muskaan d/o Shri Karam Chand, #160/15-2,Bansal Colony, Sirsa (Haryana).

-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officero/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.

-------------Respondent.

CC No. 3827 of 2010

Present:-
Shri Baldev Singh Sidhu, advocate on behalf of the complainant.
None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
The respondent has sent a written reply received vide diary No.2189 dated 7.2.2011.2.
A perusal of the complaint shows that photocopy of the request for information sent to the University does not indicate any date nor any proof has been attached to show that the requisite fee under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for seeking information was sent to the University. The information-seeker, therefore, may clarify the position on the next date of hearing on these two issues.

3. The information-seeker is asking for refund of the security amount of Rs.900/- deposited with the University in the year 2006. The University Authorities are also called upon to consider the request of the information-seeker as per the provisions of the Policy of the University in this regard.

4. To come up on 28.2.2011 at 11.00 A.M.
(R.I. Singh)February 9, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Ajit Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Ajit Singh s/o Shri Harnam Singh,
#5, Gumtala Colony, Amritsar. -------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. ------------- Respondent.

CC No. 51 of 2011

Present:-
Shri Ajit Singh complainant in person.
None on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

Issue fresh notice to the respondent-PIO.

2. To come up on 25.2.2011 at 11.00 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
February 1, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Ms Muskaan versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Muskaan d/o Shri Karam Chand, #160/15-2,
Bansal Colony, Sirsa (Haryana) -------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. ------------- Respondent.

CC No. 3827 of 2010


Present:- None on behalf of the complainant.
None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Issue fresh notice to the parties.

2. To come up on 9.2.2011 at 11.00 A.M.


(R.I. Singh)
January 20, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY TEACHER'S COOPERATIVE HOVs JOINT REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES JALLANDHAR Civil Writ Petition 91 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision:- 12.1.2011

Guru Nanak Dev University Teacher's Cooperative House Building Society Limited, Amritsar ....Petitioner
Versus
Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jallandhar and others ...Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

Present:-
Mr.Anupam Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

M e hinder S i ngh S u llar , J. (Oral)
The compendium of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a
limited purpose of deciding the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that petitioner Guru Nanak Dev University Teacher's Cooperative House Building Society Limited, Amritsar (hereinafter to be referred as “the petitioner Society”) was duly registered, vide resolution dated 18.12.2009, under the provisions of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (for brevity “the Act”).

The petitioner-Society purchased the land from Preet Inder Singh Gill, late husband of Smt.Ranbir Kaur Gill (respondent No.4) and allotted four plot bearing Nos.26, 40, 74 and 27 to him and the members of his family as per agreement.

They have deposited the requisite amount of the plots with the petitioner-Society and completed all formalities. Subsequently, the allotment of the plots was cancelled by the petitioner-Society, vide resolution dated 31.1.2002

2. As luck would have been, Preet Inder Singh Gill, husband of respondent No.4 had died. After his death, respondent No.4 moved a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar that the petitioner-Society is not giving the possession of the plots to her and her family members. The Deputy Commissioner forwarded the same to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies. The Assistant Registrar conducted the inquiry and submitted his report in favour of Ranbir Kaur private respondent No.4 to the Deputy Commissioner.

Since the report of AR was not implemented, so, the private respondent-allottee moved another application dated 1.4.2009 to the AR, who, in pursuance thereof, appointed respondent No.3 as Arbitrator. The arbitrator announced his award on 12.6.2009 (Annexure P2) in favour of Ranbir Kaur (respondent No.4) and directed the petitioner-Society to give possession of the plots to her and her family
members.

3. Aggrieved by the order of Arbitrator, the petitioner-Society filed the
appeal, which was dismissed as well by respondent No.2, vide order dated 25.11.2009 (Annexure P3). The revision instituted by the petitioner-Society was also dismissed by the revisional authority, by way of impugned order dated 2.6.2010 (Annexure P4).

4. The petitioner-Society still did not feel satisfied and filed the instant writ petition challenging the impugned orders (Annexures P2 to P4), invoking the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record with his valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petition.

6. However, the main arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner-
Society that the complaint filed by respondent No.4 cannot be treated as arbitration petition and as the arbitrator did not follow the procedure and announced the award in haste, therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed, are neither tenable nor the observations of this Court in case Mathra Dass v. The state of Punjab and others 1975 P.L.J. 42 are at all applicable to the facts of the present case, wherein it was observed that the award which does not state points of difference for decision and item of dispute is invalid, but same will not come to the
rescue of the petitioner-society as in the instant case, the arbitrator has duly set out and decided the real controversy between the parties in this relevant connection.

7. As is evident from the record that petitioner-Society purchased land
from the husband of respondent No.4 and it (petitioner-Society) allotted the plots for dwelling units as per the agreement as admitted by the Society in its written reply. Strange enough, the petitioner Society without issuing any notice to the allottee, without observing the due procedure required to be followed by the Managing Committee and General House, after receiving the approval of Assistant Registrar, without any basis and in a highly arbitrary and illegal manner cancelled
the allotment of plots of respondent No.4 and her family members.

8. After the death of her husband, respondent No.4 moved a petition/complaint to Deputy Commissioner, who referred the matter to Assistant Registrar. The Assistant Registrar conducted the inquiry and sent his report to the Deputy Commissioner. As no action was taken on the inquiry report, therefore, respondent No.4 filed another application dated 1.4.2009 for appointment of arbitrator before the Assistant Registrar, who in pursuance thereof, appointed respondent No.3 as arbitrator. Therefore, it cannot possibly be saith that the appointment of arbitrator is wrong, as urged on behalf of petitioner-society.

Moreover, any such dispute between a member, past member or the person claiming through a member, past member or deceased member and the society can be raised and decided as contemplated under section 55 of the Act.

9. The next argument of learned counsel for petitioner-society that since
respondent No.4 and her family members were not the teachers, so, they were not eligible to become members, is not only devoid of merit but misplaced as well.

There is no specific provision in the bye-laws of the society debarring the private respondent and her family members to become members of the Society. Moreover, they were duly admitted as legitimate members of the society itself as per rules made by the petitioner-society.

10. As regards the last contention, that the petitioner Society was not
duly represented before the authorities. In this respect, the revisional Court interalia observed as under:-

The Counsel for the Respondent during his arguments further stated that due to failure of initiating any proceedings on the Enquiry Report, an application dated 01.04.2009 was filed by Smt.Ranbir Kaur Gill to Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, on which the matter was referred to the Arbitrator by him. Doctor Sh.Amarjit Singh Sidhu appeared before Arbitrator on behalf of the Society and he presented the case of the Society in writing. Later on an appeal was filed on behalf of the Society. In this manner, the Society contested the whole case.

After perusal of the record, the case was decided by the Arbitrator, therefore, no evidence was required.

Petitioner cannot say that the Society was not heard. There was no illegality in the process of service. Doctor Amarjit Singh Sidhu never stated that he has not appeared on behalf of the Society. It is admitted that the plot was allotted but the possession was not given. Resolution dated 20.11.2009 clarifies the stand of the Society that Doctor Amarjit Singh Sidhu had resolution for representing the Society in the case. In this manner, he had right to represent the Society and the Society was given full opportunity to be heard and the record was perused. There is no refusal on behalf of the Society for the allotment of the plots and Society has no right to cancel the allotment of the plots. Arbitrator award and the appellate order are liable to be upheld. At the time of deciding the revision it has to be seen whether the courts below have committed any illegality or not. It is clear in the present case that injustice has been done to the members of the Gill family and they are aggrieved by the same. After the passage of long time from the allotment of the plots, Society has no right to cancel the allotment because it is only after the fulfillment all the formalities by the Members, allotment of the plots is done by the Society. Shri K.L.Dua, Advocate submitted that the enquiry
conducted by the Inquiry officer, Arbitration award and the appellate order has been rightly passed in accordance with law and further stated that the direction given by the different courts to the society for handing over the possession of the plots to Smt.Ranbir Kaur has not been complied by the society. Smt. Ranbir Kaur who is a widow, have been unnecessarily involved in the litigation. Resolution dated 31.01.2002 through which Membership and allotment of the plots is shown to have been cancelled was never brought into their notice and no agenda of fifteen days was issued for passing this resolution. A perusal the copy of the resolution, it can be construed that proceeding of this resolution has been incorporated on the blank pages left in the proceeding book.

Because there is no uniformity in the signatures. If this resolution would have been passed on 31.01.2002 then it would have produced before the Lower Courts. Whereas it was never produced. This resolution has been incorporated by the favorites of Doctor Amarjit Singh Sidhu under his president ship. In fact, if in reality, a general body meeting has been conducted then its information should have been given through beat of drum and by affixing the agenda on the main work places in the area of the operation of the Society or by getting the signatures of the Members on the Register as per provisions of Appendix “C” (Rule 23) Part-II 1 and 2 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Rules, 1963. Therefore, it can be said that the resolution was never passed because at the time of cancellation of plots no legal formalities were complied with and there was no valid reasons for passing that. These illegal proceedings were conducted for the benefit of certain person and property dealers for their personal gains. Therefore, this resolution is liable to be set aside being illegal. Shri K.L.Dua, Advocate further stated that resolution dated 20.09.2009 shows that Late Mr.Gill and his family are members of the Society. If there is any technical error in enrolling the Members then it is the responsibility of th Society and not of the Gill family. He was allotted four plots by the Society.

Society has received development charges amounting to Rs.10,000/- per plot.

Smt. Ranbir Kaur and her family members are eligible Members of the
Society. He prayed that resolution dated 31.01.2002 should be set aside.

Order of the Lower Court and that of Appellate Court should be upheld,
possession of the four plots should be given and the revision petition should be dismissed.

11. Meaning thereby, having considered and appreciated the entire
relevant material/evidence brought on record by the parties in the right perspective, the authorities below have recorded the well-reasoned finding of fact that the cancellation of allotment of plots of respondent No.4 and her family members by the petitioner-society was not only arbitrary but illegal as well. Such well-reasoned and well-articulated findings of fact based on the evidence, cannot possibly be interfered with and the remaining arguments involving factual matrix, cannot be
re-appreciated, while exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, unless and until, the same are illegal and perverse. No such patent illegality or legal infirmity has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, so as to take a contrary view, than that of well reasoned decision already arrived at by the authorities below, in this relevant behalf.

12. No other point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

13. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore,
the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed in the obtaining circumstances of the case.

(Mehinder Singh Sullar)
Judge

Mohinder Raj versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Mohinder Raj, DEO,
Microbiology Department,
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. -------------Complainant.
Vs.
The Public Information Officer,
o/o the Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. --------------------Respondent.

CC No. 3648 of 2010
1st Hearing: 20.12.2010

Present:-
Shri Mohinder Raj complainant in person.
Dr. Inderjit Singh, Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The respondent submits a written reply which is taken on record.

2. A perusal of the queries dated 17.6.2010 show that the present complainant is an employee of the university and he is seeking information which is purely personnel. The plea of the respondent is that personal information is not disclosable under Section 8(i)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and therefore, the request of the applicant could have been straightway rejected. Nevertheless, the University has answered some of his queries and as a good employer, they are always willing to furnish further details.

3. The complainant was specifically asked as to what public interest, if any, is involved in the information being sought by him. He has also confirmed that the information is purely personal pertaining to himself. He has not explained any public interest. Hence, the complaint case is closed.

(R.I. Singh)
December 20, 2010 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

GURBINDER SINGH MAHAL AND OTHERS Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition 4131 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Gurbinder Singh Mahal and others ...Petitioners
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another ...Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

Present:
Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for
Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate for the respondents.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Counsel for the parties agree that the issue agitated in the present petition would be covered by the decision of this Court in CWP No. 12069 of 2010 titled as Anudeep Randhawa and others versus Guru Nanak Dev University and others decided on 13.09.2010. In view of this position, the present writ petition is allowed in the same terms.

(RANJIT SINGH )
JUDGE


SATBIR SINGH AND OTHERS Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS Civil Writ Petition N o. 13017 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 02.11.2010

Satbir Singh and others ...Petitioners Versus Guru Nanak Dev University and others ...Respondents

CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

Present:
Mr. N.K. Banka, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Madan Sandhu, Advocate for Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate for respondent No. 1.
Mr. Sameer Sachdev, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Though there is a written request for adjournment but counsel for the petitioners prays for permission to withdraw the present petition to file a fresh one with better particulars. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE

MANRAJ SINGH RANDHAWA Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND OTHERS Civil Writ Petition N o. 7548 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 27.10.2010

Manraj Singh Randhawa ...Petitioner Versus

Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
Present:
None for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate
for respondents No. 1 to 5.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Prayer made in the petition is for re-evaluation. As per the reply filed, there is no provision for re-evaluation and now the same has been substituted with the provision whereby the answer sheets can be shown to the candidate. Let the petitioner make an application, if he desires to see his answer-sheets. If he does so, University will make an arrangement to show him answer-sheets, accordingly. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

( RANJIT SINGH )
JUDGE

AMRIT PAL SINGH WALIA Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition No.19182 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Amrit Pal Singh Walia Versus Guru Nanak Dev University,Amritsar and another
Present:
Mr.Rajinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

RANJIT SINGH, J.
The petitioner has been adjusted for admission at a place for which he opted. His representation has been rejected by the Vice- Chancellor. No cause for interference is made out. Dismissed.
(RANJIT SINGH)
ramesh JUDGE

VANDANA SHARMA Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR Civil Writ Petition N o.5045 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Vandana Sharma ...Petitioner Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar ...Respondent
Present:
Mr. G.P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Monica Chibber Sharma, DAG, Punjab for the State. Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Counsel for the respondents points out that for issue of approval for the appointment, the petitioner was relegated to the remedy before the Education Tribunal and the same prayer has been disposed of. The grievance in the writ petition is for non-payment of salary and the defence is that it is due to non-grant of approval by the University. The grievance aised in the petition can very well be raised before the Tribunal. The petitioner is relegated to the remedy of approaching to the Tribunal. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE

JASPAL KAUR Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND OTHERS Regular Second Appeal No. 3737 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : October 15, 2010
Jaspal Kaur
....Appellant
versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others

....Respondents

Coram: Honble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal
Present :
Mr. L. M. Gulati, Advocate, for the appellant Appellant also in person.
L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the instant second appeal.
Dismissed as withdrawn.

(L.N. Mittal)
Judge

HARJOT SINGH Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition No. 14757 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 13.10.2010
Harjot Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University and another …Respondents
CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
Present:
Mr. Arun Abrol, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate for respondent No. 1.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Costs paid. Reply has already been filed.Counsel for the University has produced the answer sheet in ++sealed cover, which is opened. Answer sheet is shown to the candidate present in the Court for perusal in the presence of counsel for the University.After perusal of the answer sheet, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been under-assessed and prays that the answer sheet be checked in the presence of two other examiners as is provided in the rule. View of the petitioner that he is under-assessed cannot be a valid reason to call for interference. It will be beyond the scope of the writ court to invoke jurisdiction on such grounds. The requirement of the rule is for showing the answer sheet and it has been complied with. No answer given by the petitioner is left unmarked. Accordingly, no case for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is made out. The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner would be entitled to seek refund of ` 10,000/- which he had deposited in the Registry of this Court. Let the petitioner file appropriate application in this regard before the Registrar, who thereafter would refund the amount to the petitioner. Answer sheet produced before this Court is returned to the counsel for the University.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE

AMRIT PAL SINGH WALIA Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition No.18258 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Amrit Pal Singh Walia Versus Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another

Present: Mr.Rajinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

RANJIT SINGH, J.
Counsel says that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide his representation. Though there may not be much cause to permit the petitioner to change his option, but still the respondents may consider the representation filed by the petitioner in accordance with law by passing an appropriate order thereon. With the above observations, the present writ petition is disposed of.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE

NISHA Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition No.18157 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Nisha Versus Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another
Present: Mr.Rajinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

RANJIT SINGH, J.
The petitioner has a grievance that she missed the chance for participating in the counselling due to delayed declaration of her result. The petitioner made a last ditch effort to meet the requirements for participating in the counselling but remained unsuccessful as she could not deposit a sum of ` 500/-, which was the essential requirement. Thereafter the petitioner has represented to the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent-University but no order has been passed. Since the petitioner could not meet the requirement of enabling her to participate in the counselling, it may not be appropriate to issue any direction. However, the Vice-Chancellor is requested to consider the representation made by the petitioner and dispose of the same in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE

GNDU youth fest valedictory function today

The prize distribution function of the four-day Zonal Youth Festival (D-Zone) of Guru Nanak Dev University will be held on September 24 at the Dashmesh Auditorium here. According to Dr Jagjit Kaur, Director, Youth Welfare, GNDU, Registrar Dr Inderjit Singh would be the chief guest and award trophies to winners of different competitions held during the festival.


Ms Alka versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

d/o Shri Madan Mohan,
c/o Bishambher Saini, #183, Saini Mohalla,
Bajri Company, Pathankot-145001. _______ Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar (Punjab.)-143005 _______ Respondent.

CC No. 2488 of 2010

Present:-
None on behalf of the complainant.

Shri Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

The complainant was absent on 7.9.2010 and the case was adjourned to 20.9.2010 to enable the complainant to file her rejoinder. She is again absent today without intimation. In view of the reply filed by the respondent, the complaint case is closed.


(R.I. Singh)
September 20, 2010 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

DR BALWINDER SINGH Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR C.W.P. No. 995 of 2010. [OandM]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Balwinder Singh Petitioner through
Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. Respondent through
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate.

CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL]
The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 01.01.2010 [Annexure P-14] passed by the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar on the basis of the review decision taken by the Syndicate in its meeting held on 03.12.2009 [Annexure P-13], whereby the punishment of stoppage of two yearly increments with cumulative effect, disqualification from Headship of the Department for three years as well as no assignment of Supervisorship of new Ph.D. Students for one year, has been imposed on the petitioner for his alleged act of plagiarism in Research papers/Research Articles. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the Inquiry Report [Annexure P-3] holding him guilty of plagiarism.

[2]. The petitioner joined the respondent University as a Lecturer on 15.12.1990 in its Department of Commerce and Business Management. While working as such, he was further appointed as a Reader in the University.

[3]. Shorn of the details, it appears that an anonymous complaint was received against the petitioner alleging plagiarism in respect of three published articles written by him. The undisputed facts are that no copy of the anonymous complaint was sent to the petitioner nor any formal charge-sheet based upon the said complaint was ever served upon him. The Vice-Chancellor of the respondent University constituted an Inquiry Committee comprising three Professors from different places to inquire into the allegation levelled against the petitioner and submit their report. Unfortunately, the Inquiry Committee also did not issue any notice to the petitioner nor sought any explanation nor associated him at any level while conducting the inquiry, except that the Committee allegedly gave an oral personal hearing to the petitioner and his co-Authors/Associates when all these persons admitted to the fact that they indulged in the reported instances of copying....

[4]. Based upon the afore-stated inquiry report, the Dean, Academic Affairs of the University, vide Memo dated 02.12.2008 [Annexure P-5] formulated the nature of punishment to be awarded to the petitioner and his Associates and based upon those recommendations, the Syndicate in its meeting held on 04.12.2008 decided as follows:-
It has been passed that due to plagiarism committed in the research papers/research articles by Dr. Balwinder Singh, Reader, Department of Commerce and Business Management, four yearly increments have been stopped with cumulative effect and he has been debarred from the headship of the department for another 4 years from the date of the decision of the syndicate. It has also been passed that he should not be appointed as a Supervisor to new Ph.D. Students for 4 years from the date of the decision of the Syndicate
.
[5]. No show cause notice or opportunity of hearing was accorded to the petitioner even before taking the above reproduced decision.
[6]. When the petitioner came to know about the decision taken by the Syndicate in its meeting held on 04.12.2008, he submitted a representation to the Vice-Chancellor on 06.04.2009 [Annexure P-10] wherein he specifically raised, inter-alia, the following issues:-
3. I fail to understand the nature of inquiry committee. No proper procedure was followed to conduct the inquiry. Neither me nor my co-authors were asked in writing to appear before the committee. Even my statement was not recorded. I could not find out the reasons till date that why my response was sought for three papers and inquiry committee was given five papers
.
4. To my dismay, the inquiry committee observed in a very blatant manner in its report that I have admitted the charge of plagiarism which is completely unfounded.
5. The Committee submitted report on 22.08.2007 and it was presented in Syndicate held 02.09.2008 which means a gap of 12 months. I had been thinking all these months that the committee has accepted my version and has exonerated me. I could not find out the reason as to why the report was presented in syndicate after so many months. [Emphasis applied]
.
[7]. The petitioner thereafter represented before various other authorities in the University which were finally taken up by the Syndicate in its meeting held on 07.12.2009 wherein after reviewing its earlier decision dated 04.12.2008, the Syndicate decided as follows:-
The Syndicate while reviewing that decision dated 04.12.2008 has decided as follows:
1. Instead of four, two yearly increments with cumulative effect of Dr. Balwinder Singh, Reader, Department of Commerce and Business Management are being stopped for plagiarism in research papers/research articles.
2. He is being disqualified for 3 years instead of 4 years from being the head of the department.
3. He should not be appointed as a Supervisor of new Ph.D. Cases for 1 year from the date of the meeting of the Syndicate [3.12.2009].
[8]. Based upon the afore-stated decision of the Syndicate, the impugned order dated 01.01.2010 [Annexure P-14] has been issued, giving rise to these proceedings.
[9]. The respondents have filed their reply/affidavit defending the impugned action.
[10]. The solitary question that arises for consideration is as to whether or not the petitioner has been punished by following the prescribed procedure?
[11]. The affairs of the respondent University are governed by the provisions contained in the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar Act, 1969 as amended from time to time and the Statutes framed thereunder. The Calendar [Volume I] of the University comprising the
Acts and Statutes, provides for the penalties to be imposed on the employees of the University and the procedure to be followed for imposing such punishments, and relevant part thereof reads as follows:-
33[i] The following penalties may for good and sufficient reason be imposed upon any employee of the university:-
[a] Censure.
[b] Withholding of increment or promotion.
[c] reduction to a lower post or to a lower stage in the same post.
[d] Recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the university by negligence or breach of orders.
[e] Removal from the service of the University which does not disqualify from future employment.
[f] Dismissal from the service of the university which ordinarily disqualifies from future employment.
[g] Compulsory retirement.
Provided that where it is proposed to take action as mentioned under clause [c], [e], [f] or [g] above, in the case of an employee on foreign service, a recommendation to that effect shall be made to his parent department and the parent department may take such action as it considers necessary on such recommendations.
[ii] except where otherwise laid down in the Statutes, the authority competent to appoint shall be competent to impose any kind of punishment including removal from office on grounds of misconduct, gross insufficiency, etc. in the event of any such orders of punishment by the competent authority, the employee concern shall have the right of appeal to the next higher authority whose decision shall be final.
[iii] No penalty of dismissal, removal or reduction shall be imposed unless the employee has been given a reasonable opportunity of showing causes against the action proposed to be taken in regard to him.
[iv] The grounds on which it is proposed to take action under clause [c], [e], [f] or [g] shall be reduced to the form of a definite charge or charges which shall be communicated in writing to the employee concerned and he shall be required within a reasonable time to state in writing whether he admits the truth of all or any of the charges, what explanation or defence if any, he has to offer and whether he desires to be heard in person. If he so desires or if the appointing authority so directs, an oral inquiry shall be held at which all evidence shall be heard as to such of the charges are not admitted. The person
charged shall be entitled to cross-examine the witnesses, to have such witness called as he may wish provided that the officer conducting the inquiry may for reasons to be recorded in writing refuse to call any witness. The proceeding shall contain sufficient record of the evidence and the statement of the findings and the grounds thereof. When it is proposed to take action under clause [a],
[b] or [d] no order shall be passed imposing a penalty on an employee unless he has been given an adequate opportunity of making any representation that he may desire to make and such representation has been taken into consideration. [Emphasis applied]
[12]. On a plain reading of the statutory provisions, reproduced above, it is apparent that even before imposing the punishments prescribed under clauses [a], [b] or [d], namely, Censure, withholding of increment or promotion or recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the University ....... an adequate opportunity to make representation before imposition of such penalty is sine-qua-non. In the case in hand, the petitioner has been subjected to three punishments, namely, stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect, disqualified for three years from Headship of the Department and non-assignment of Supervisorship of new Ph.D. Students for one year, which, in my considered view, falls in clause [c] as it amounts to reduction to a lower stage in the same post. For imposition of such punishment, it was imperative upon the University to follow the procedure as laid down in clause [iv] of Para 33 in terms whereof the grounds on which such action is proposed to be taken are required to be reduced in the form of charge[s] and communicated to the employee concerned in writing and the punishment can be imposed only after an adequate opportunity of hearing, namely, a regular inquiry is held.

[13]. In the case in hand, no formal charge-sheet was ever served upon the petitioner. No opportunity was afforded to him to submit his defence plea or lead any evidence. The petitioner has specifically denied that he ever admitted the allegations during the course of oral personal hearing alleged to have been granted by the Inquiry Committee. Be that as it may, once the petitioner had specifically denied such admission, it was imperative upon the University Authorities to return a firm finding of fact as to whether or not the petitioner had admitted his guilt.

[14]. As noticed above, the University Authorities have proceeded against the petitioner in a manner totally alien to the principles of audi-alteram-partem. The proceedings conducted by the Inquiry Committee, which, it appears, was a preliminary inquiry only, have been treated as regular inquiry and that too without associating the petitioner. Not only that, no copy of the inquiry report was ever supplied to him before accepting it or deciding to impose the penalty. The petitioner was not heard even on the quantum of punishment. The entire exercise has been carried out behind the back of the petitioner which apparently lacks bona-fide. Strangely, two of the punishments imposed upon the petitioner do not find mention in clause [i] of Para 33 which enlists the types of punishments that can be imposed upon an employee. Be that as it may, an adequate opportunity of hearing ought to have been granted to the petitioner before taking a punitive action against him.

[15]. The fact that the subsequent representations made by the petitioner were considered by the Syndicate also does not cut much ice as such like post-decisional hearing does not meet the requirement of principles of natural justice.

[16]. For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed with costs of `10,000/-; the impugned orders dated 3.12.2009 [Annexure P-13] and 01.01.2010 [Annexure P-14] are hereby quashed. However, the respondent University shall be at liberty to treat the inquiry report [Annexure P-3] as a preliminary inquiry report and proceed against the petitioner, in accordance with law.
[17]. Dasti.

(SURYA KANT)
JUDGE

Jaskarn Singh Sidhu versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Jaskarn Singh Sidhu,
Ward No-16, Mohall Radharka,
Mansa-151505. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1266 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Sarbagh Singh on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The complainant states that complete information in respect of point nos. 3, 10 & 11 of the items of information in his application has not been supplied. The grievance of the complainant has been found to be without any basis for the following reasons:-

1. The letter No. SVC/1848 dated 11-12-2009 of the Vice Chancellor’s office with regard to which the complainant has given his application, states that two research papers were submitted by the complainant at the time of interview whereas according to the members of the committee, both the research papers were actually the same. The complainant wants the respondent to tell him whether there is any law which he has violated , but the question of the requirement of any legal provision for the assessment of research papers does not arise, and the question put by the complainant is redundant and is disallowed.

2. The respondent has shown to the Court as well to the complainant that marks were not awarded by the Committee in the interview and therefore, the information for which the complainant has applied against item nos. 10 and 11 is “nil”.
No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
27th May, 2010

Simarjeet Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Simarjeet Singh,
S/o. Sh. Dalbir Singh,
R/o. Village Mallian, P.O. Behirampur,
District- Gurdaspur.
________ Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

AC No. 376 of 2010

Present:
i) Ms. Ravinder Kaur Manaise, Advocate and Sri Amandeep Singh Manaise , Advocate, on behalf of the appellant.
ii) Sh. Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The appellant in this case has asked for copies of his corrected answer sheets which are part of the internal assessment process of the B.Ed. course examination in which he was a candidate. This information has been correctly denied to him by the PIO since it is affected by Section 8(1) (e) and (g) of the RTI Act, 2005 . It is affected by Section 8(1) (e) because of the fiduciary relationship between the teachers and the college management and by Section 8(1) (g) because of the possible unpleasant consequences of the revelation of an examiner’s identity to a dissatisfied student.

The respondent has also shown to the Commission a copy of the university regulations, which states that if there is a difference of more than 20% in the external and internal marks of a candidate, the internal marks will be brought to the same level as the external marks. This being the case the appellant’s grievance, that he has done very well in the external examination and has got very low marks in the internal assessment, has automatically been taken care of.

For the above reasons, I do not find any strength in this second appeal, which is dismissed.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
27th May, 2010

Jaskarn Singh Sidhu versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Jaskarn Singh Sidhu,
Ward No-16, Mohall Radharka,
Mansa-151505. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1266 of 2010

Present: None

ORDER
The respondent has sent a copy of the information which was sent to the complainant, vide his office letter dated 10-03-2010, after the receipt of the requisite fees on 05-03-2010. The complainant, on the other hand, has sought an adjournment. The case is adjourned to 10 AM on 07-05-2010 but, since the information for which the complainant has applied was received by him after he had sent his complaint to the Commission, he should attend the next hearing prepared to point out the items of information mentioned in his application which have not yet been supplied to him.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
16th April, 2010

Ms Inder Bir Kaur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Inder Bir Kaur,
R/o. Sahib Niwas, H No- 54,
Street No.1, Behind Kamal Hospital, Chander Colony,
Distt- Tarantaran- 143401. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1133 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant in person .
ii) Sh. Mohinder Singh, Asstt. Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The application for information in this case has already been considered in CC-2037 of 2009, which was disposed of by the Commission’s orders dated
09-10-2009, on the information having been given to the complainant in compliance with the Commission’s orders.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
9th April, 2010

Rahul Kumar versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Rahul Kumar,
S/o. Sh. Rajinder Kumar,
H. No-2090/11, Gali No-1,
Near Police Station, Islamabad,
Amritsar. ________Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

AC No. 979 of 2009

Present: None.

ORDER
Neither the appellant nor the respondent are present. No request for adjournment has also been received from either party. From this I conclude that the appellant does not wish to pursue his appeal any further.

Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
14th January, 2010

Jaskarn Singh Sidhu versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Jaskarn Singh Sidhu,
Ward No-16, Mohalla Radharka,
Mansa-151505. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 3491 of 2009

Present: None.

ORDER
The respondent has made a written submission that the complainant has informed him that he does not need the remaining information and he will send a fresh application to the respondent as and when he requires the same.
In view of the above, no further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
14th January, 2010

Dr Jaskarn Singh Sidhu versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Dr. Jaskarn Singh Sidhu,
Ward No-16, Mohalla Radharka,
Mansa-151505.
________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 3491 of 2009

Present:
i) Dr. Jaskarn Singh Sidhu, complainant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has made a written submission that full information has been provided to the complainant and an adjournment has been requested in case the complainant is not satisfied. The adjournment has been requested for the reason that the Legal Advisor, Sardar Harbhajan Singh, who normally appears on behalf of the PIO in this Court, has met with an accident and has fractured a leg .

The complainant states that he is not satisfied with the information that he has received and a list of alleged deficiencies which he has submitted to the Court, should be sent to the respondent along with these orders with the direction that he should come prepared with a response to the same on the next date of hearing, along with any additional information which is required to be given to the complainant for the removal of his grievances.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 14-01-2010 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab

17th December, 2009

PROF (DR ) KEHAR SINGH RETIRED PROFESSOR Vs THE GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY and ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No. 13247 of 2009 (O and M)

Date of Decision: 10.12.2009

Prof.(Dr.) Kehar Singh, Retired Professor and ...Petitioner
Vs.
The Guru Nanak Dev University and Ors. ...Respondents

CORAM:
Honble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma

Present:
Dr.HPS Rahi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.D.S.Patwalia, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
Mr.R.L.Gupta, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for respondents No.2 and 3.

V inod K.Sharma, J . (Oral)
CM No.19960-61 of 2009
Allowed as prayed for.

CWP No.13247 of 2009
The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the impugned part of order Annexure P.9 vide which Audit
Objection has been raised against the decision taken by the Syndicate for giving benefit of 5 years service on account of Ph.D degree earned by the petitioner prior to his joining service as a Reader.

The petitioner retired from the service of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar as Professor and Director of Computer Centre in the year 1993. In the year 1994 the petitioner made a representation claiming benefit of the addition of 5 years of service to his qualifying service as per the provisions of Rule 4.2 (A) of the Punjab Civil Services (Pension), Rules Vol.2.The request made by the petitioner was not accepted. The petitioner approached this court by filing CWP No.11563 of 1998, which was decided on 15.12.2008. The operative part of the order passed by this court reads as under;

It will be too technical to deny the member of faculty benefit of provisions of Punjab Civil Service (Pension) Rules (Volume-II) as noticed in Section 4.2 and 11(c)(1) of Guru Nanak Dev University Calendar Volume 1 Act and Statutes, 2007, on the ground that recruitment rules did not contain such a provision. This beneficial provision was only made for the members of the faculty of the University who put in their time and energy in research and equip themselves with better education based on research for imparting learning. For acquiring education and learning and then teaching, there always ought to be premium and no discount can be provided
by the institution who are wedded to the cause of education.

In the present case, no conscious decision has been taken by the University. It has relied upon the audit objection. The person raising the audit objection has done so in a mechanical manner without looking to as to why these provisions were adopted. Therefore, the highest quarters of the University in whom a decision making power vest should take a conscious decision as to whether the Professors, Readers or members of the faculty who had spent their considerable time in acquiring education are to be given benefit of these provisos or not.

In order to implement the decision of this court, the matter was placed before the Syndicate of the University on 23.2.2009. The request of the petitioner was accepted and the petitioner was allowed benefit of 5 years service on account of acquiring Ph.D. degree prior to his joining the service. The decision taken by the syndicate in its meeting reads as under:-

74. Keeping in view the decision rendered by the Honble Punjab and Haryana High Court and according to statue 11(c) Volume 5 of the University Calendar 2007, the matter was considered regarding the granting of five years service benefit for having Ph.D. Degree prior to joining the service to Dr.Kehar Singh, Retd. Professor, Mathematics Department.

The matter as per the note below was also considered Note 1: Dr.Kehar Singh had joined the University Service as Reader on 8.10.1970. His date of birth is 15.10.1933 and he was awarded a Ph.D. Degree in the year 1969. Dr.Kehar Singh has retired from the University from 31.12.1993. He has requested for giving of five years service benefit because of having got Ph.D. Degree prior to joining the University service, for which he had filed a writ petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In the decision of the writ petition, the Honble High Court has rendered the following decision:-

In the present case, no conscious decision has been taken by the University. It has relied upon the audit objection. The person raising the audit objection has done so in a mechanical manner without looking to as to why these provisions were adopted. Therefore, the
highest quarters of the University in whom a decision making power vest should take a conscious decision as to whether the Professors, Readers or members of the faculty who had spent their considerable time in acquiring education are to be given benefit of these provisos or not.

A decision shall betaken by the University within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Note: 2 The statue 11 © Volume 5 of the University Calendar 2207 is as follows:

A university employee appointed to a service or post after the twenty-sixth day of October, 1960 shall be eligible to add to his service qualifying the superannution pension (but not for any other class of pension) the actual period not exceeding one fourth of the length of this service or the actual period by which his age at the time of recruitment exceeded twenty five years or a period of five years, whichever is less, if the service or post to which the University employee is appointed is one:

(a) for which Post-graduate/Research Degree or Specialist qualification or experience in scientific technological or professional fields is essential; and

(b) to which candidate of more than twenty five years of age are normally recruited.

Provided that the concession shall not be admissible to a University employee unless his actual qualifying service at the time he quits University service is not less than ten years.

Provided further that this concession shall be admissible only if the recruitment rules in respect of the said service or post contain a specific provision that the service or post is one which carries the benefit of this rule.

(2) A University employee who is recruited at the age of thirty-five years or more, may within a period of three months from the date of his appointment elect to forego his right to pension whereupon he shall be eligible to subscribe to a Contributory Provident Fund.

(3) The option referred to in sub-rule (2) once exercised shall be final.

The Office has made a remark that such benefit is being upheld as per the above statute by the audit.

Hereby resolved that as per statue 11(c) Volume 5 of the University Calendar 2007, Dr.Kehar Singh retired Professor Mathematics Department is given five years service benefit for having got Ph.D. Degree prior to joining the service as Reader.

In spite of the decision of the Syndicate the relief has been declined to the petitioner by impugned part of order, attached as Annexure P.9, on account of audit department having not accepted the decision, without any specific order in this regard by the audit department.

Notice of the writ petition was issued.

Learned counsel appearing for the University has not been able to contest the writ, for the reason, that the Syndicate of the University which is the highest body has taken a decision for granting requisite benefit to the petitioner under Rule 4.2(A) Punjab Civil Services (Pension) Rules (Vol.II) which stood adopted by the University. The contention of the learned counsel, that there was no specific rule in the University regarding grant of this benefit stood declined by this court in the previous writ petition. It is not open to the University to raise the same plea again which stood rejected by this court.

Mr.R.L.Gupta, Additional A.G. Punjab, however, opposed the writ petition again on the same ground, that for want of rule in the University Calendar, the audit department is right in raising objection to the benefit granted by the Syndicate of the University.

This plea of the learned State counsel cannot be accepted in view of the decision of this court vide which similar plea raised by the
University was rejected.

It was held by this court that the provisions of Rule 4.2(A) of the Rules are in the nature of beneficial Rule and the benefit accrued to
employee thereunder cannot be defeated on technical plea. The audit department has no role to play in a conscious decision taken by the competent authority.

For the reasons stated above, this writ petition is allowed. The audit objection raised by the Audit Department is quashed. The respondents are directed to grant benefit to the petitioner, in pursuance to the decision taken by the Syndicate on 23.2.2009. The consequential benefit be released to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

No costs.

(Vinod K.Sharma)
Judge

GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR THROUGH ITS RE Vs THE PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT AMRITSAR AND

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P. No.16998 of 2000

Date of Decision: 23.11.2009

Guru Nank Dev University, Amritsar through its Registrar
.....Petitioner
Versus
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Amritsar and another
....Respondents

Present:
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate with
Mr. Alok Jagga, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Vikramjit Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ? Yes
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes

K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)
1. The order that is challenged in the writ petition is a direction for reinstatement of a person, who had been appointed as a Lab Technician in a University. The initial order of appointment was purported to be on purely temporary and ad hoc basis for a period of six months. An extension of the contract was made on 10.01.1990, which again stated that the appointment was purely temporary for a further period of three months or till the
post was filled through regular selection, whichever was earlier.

This order shows that the initial appointment had not been done
through regular selection. In the meanwhile, it appears that there had been a complaint that the diploma on the basis of which the workman had been provisionally selected was not recognized since it had been issued by a private institution called Christian Medical Association. Communications had been made between the University and the Director, Health and Family Welfare to elicit information whether diploma issued by Christian Medical Association of India was recognized or not.

Even when the exchange of communications had been in progress, a further extension was offered to the workman on 20.07.1990 where again it was submitted that the appointment was purely temporary on ad hoc basis for a period of three months and that provisional appointment was subject to the diploma being recognized by the Punjab Government. The notice of termination was issued and he was stated to be relieved from duty on 08.10.1990. It was this communication, which was the subject of dispute or which made reference to the Labour Court.

2. The Labour Court found that there was no definite proof that the diploma issued by the Christian Medical Association had not been recognized by the State of Punjab and the termination
order had been issued even before any decision had been taken by the State. The learned counsel, Sh. Patwalia appearing on behalf of the petitioner points out that the termination order was not on the basis that the certificate had not been proved to be validly issued by an authority which was recognized by the State of Punjab but on the operation of a clause in the appointment order that the appointment was purely on ad hoc basis for a period of three months. The reference to the order also as being subject to the recognition of the diploma by the Punjab State was a matter which had bearing to the provisional status of appointment and it would be irrelevant that a final decision came to be taken without ascertaining authenticity and validity of the diploma as such.

3. The learned counsel refers to a decision of a Division Bench of this Honble Court in Executive Officer Nagar Panchayat Rajasansi Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and another 2009(4) SCT 501 where the matter relating to a termination of service and the applicability of Section 25-F had been considered in the context of abolition of post in workcharged
establishment and a further consideration was also made with reference to the manner of engagement as being illegal and
contrary to the terms of recruitment rules. The issue of continuation of an employment for more than 240 days was found in the said judgment to be not material. Even without reference to the above judgment, I am of the view that the case will have to be decided on twin considerations; One, when the nature of engagement was temporary on ad hoc basis for a particular period. Two, the effect of appointment of university on not regular basis but for a specific period. In my view, if the order of appointment itself stipulated that the employment was for a particular period, the expiry of the said period brings automatic termination to which the provisions of Section 2(oo)(bb) will operate. It could have been possible for the workman to contend that the appointment on casual basis was an instance of unfair labour practice covered by Entry 10 in Schedule V of the Industrial Disputes Act. No such contention had been made by the workman and his whole contention was that there was no opportunity given to him to explain that the certificate of diploma issued by the Christian Medical Association had not been recognized by the Guru Nanak Dev University. The recognition or otherwise of the diploma could be purely incidental but the more fundamental question is whether the termination that was effected qualified for the term retrenchment to which the provision of Section 25-F could have applied. I find no scope for such a contention in a case where the appointment had been made by the University not through regular appointment but on ad hoc basis for a particular period and when that period elapsed, the employment also stood terminated. It did not amount to retrenchment to which the provisions of Section 25-F could have applied. The Labour Court had misdirected itself considering the issue in the context of whether the certificate issued by the Christian Medical Association had been recognized by the Punjab Government or not. It omitted to note that that the termiantion was not on that basis. The termination was merely recording a fact that the period of appointment had elapsed by the terms of contract.

4. The award of the Labour Court is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. There shall be, however, no direction as to
costs.
(K. KANNAN)
JUDGE

K C GARGVsGURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and AND OTHER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.15792 of 1993

Decided on : 19-11-2009

K.C. Garg .... Petitioner
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another .... Respondents

CORAM:-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER.

Present:-
Mr. Arun Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Advocate,for
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate, for the respondents.

MAHESH GROVER, J (Oral).
The petitioner, who has challenged the appointment of respondent No.3, has since expired and the aforesaid respondent also stands retired, therefore, this petition has become infructuous.

Dismissed as having become infructuous.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE

Sh Talwinder Singh Sarkaria versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,
r/o Fouji Di Chakki,
Backside Chowk Gurdwara Patti,
Sarkar Kot Khalsa,PO.Khalsa College,
Amritsar - 143002. __________Appellant
Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
__________ Respondent
AC No. 321 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,complainant in person.
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh,Legal Adviser, and Sri Mohinder Singh, Asstt. Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
In compliance with the Court’s orders dated 09-10-2009, the respondent has informed the complainant and sent a written submission to the Court that the appointment letter referred to in the notings of the Assistant Registrar, Establishment, relates to an appointment made on contract basis on fixed pay, whereas the information given to the complainant pertains to appointments made on daily wages. Secondly, it has been clarified by the respondent that the appointment letter issued to him on 13-11-2000 on his appointment as security guard on fixed pay, erroneously described him as “security officer”, which is a typographical mistake.
No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
6th November, 2009

Sh Arun Gosain versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh.Arun Gosain,
# 290-91, Improvement Trust Colony,
Scheme No-5, Jail Road,
Gurdaspur.
________ Appeallant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
__________ Respondent
AC No. 639 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh,Legal Adviser, and Sri Mohinder Singh, Asstt. Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The complainant in this case has asked for copies of his answer sheets of the 9th and 10th semester examinations conducted by the Guru Nanak Dev University in November, 2007 and May, 2008 respectively. The information has been denied on the basis that it is confidential and the refusal of the PIO has been upheld by the first appellate authority. Hence this second appeal.
The appellant has in his appeal stated that the information should be provided to him because it does not relate to any third party and its disclosure has no relationship with any public activity and to the privacy of any individual.

The respondent has put forth the argument in the Court today that the required information, namely, the answer sheets held in the custody of the University, are marked by the examiners and in case these are made available to the concerned student, the information about the marks given by the examiner for each answer would also get revealed. This information, however, is held by the University in a fiduciary relationship with the examiner, and it cannot be disclosed under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. The respondent also states that the disclosure of the marks given by the examiner for each answer as well as his identity, which may get revealed inadvertently, may also endanger his life or physical safety and such disclosure is therefore also exempted under Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act.

There is considerable strength in the arguments advanced by the respondent, I, therefore, uphold the decision of the first appellate authority and dismiss this second appeal .

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
5th November, 2009

Mrs Arvind Sohi versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Mrs. Arvind Sohi,
W/o Sh. Harvinder Singh Mand,
VPO Lohat Baddi, Tehsil Raikot,
Distt. Ludhiana.
________ Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

AC No. 557 of 2009

Present:
i) Dr Rajinder K.Singla on behalf of the appellant .
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh, Advocate,.Legal Adviser ,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent states that no application of the appellant dated 05-11-2008 for reconsideration has been found in the records of the university.
The notings and the decision taken on the application of the appellant dated 06-09-2008 (not 05-11-2008 as recorded in the orders dated 24-09-2009) has already been given by the respondent to the appellant. The appellant wants to know why her request for extra ordinary leave was rejected when similar applications of other Professors had been accepted. This , however, is not a valid query under the RTI Act, 2005 .
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
15 October, 2009 Punjab

NEHA JUNEJAVsGURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER CWP 15813 of 2009



KARUNESH SHARMAVsGURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY and OTHERS CWP 1155 of 2009

Karunesh Sharma
Vs.
Guru Nanak Dev University and others.

Present:
Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. H.L. Tikku, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Yashmeet and Mr. Sumeet Goel, Advocates.
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate.
Mr. Patwalia submits that since the petitioner was not at fault,
his examination form will be accepted and he will be allowed to complete the course. The petitioner has already appeared for Part-II examination.

Result of the petitioner shall also be declared.

In view of the above circumstances, Mr. Dadwal submits that he has instructions not to pursue the petition further.

It is left to the respondent-university to deal with the respondent no.3 in accordance with law.

Petition dismissed as such.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE


Sh Talwinder Singh Sarkaria versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,
r/o Fouji Di Chakki,
Backside Chowk Gurdwara Patti,
Sarkar Kot Khalsa,PO.Khalsa College,
Amritsar - 143002. __________Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
__________ Respondent
AC No. 321 of 2009

Present:
i)Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,complainant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The complainant points out that in the information provided to him by the respondent vide his letter dated 6-2-2009, it has been mentioned in the notings dated 16-01-2006 of the Assistant Registrar, Establishment, proposing that the complainant’s services may be terminated, that it has been specified in the appointment letter of Talwinder Singh that his services can be dispensed with at any time without notice. On the other hand, the respondent has mentioned in his response to point Nos. 2 & 3 that no joining order or joining letter was issued to the security guards who were appointed on daily wages. The complainant is justifiably asking for a copy of the “appointment letter” mentioned in the notings of the A.R. Establishment, and the respondent is directed to send a copy of the same to the complainant by post within seven days of the date of receipt of these orders. The respondent should also attend the next hearing of the case and submit to the Court a copy of the information sent to the complainant in pursuance of these orders.
Adjourned to 10 A.M. on 6-11-2009 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
9th October, 2009 Punjab

Ms Inder Bir Kaur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Inder Bir Kaur,
Sahib Niwas, H.No. 54, St. No.1,
Behind kamal Hospital,
Chander Colony, Tarn-Taran-143401. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 2037 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant
ii) Sh. Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar and Sh.Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has , in compliance with the Court’s orders dated 04-09-2009, sent the information in response to the complainant’s application dated 11-05-2009 vide his letter dated 14-09-2009 . The information in response to the complainant’s application dated 15-05-2009 has not been sent because the requisite fee of Rs.4/- has still not been deposited by the complainant.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
9th October, 2009 Punjab

Arvind Sohi versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Mrs. Arvind Sohi,
W/o Sh. Harvinder Singh Mand,
VPO Lohat Baddi, Tehsil Raikot,
Distt. Ludhiana.
________ Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

AC No. 557 of 2009

Present:
i) Dr Rajinder K.Singla on behalf of the appellant .
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh, Advocate and Sri Mohinder Singh, Asstt.Registrar,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent seeks some more time to locate the application of the appellant dated 5-11-2008 for reconsideration of her application for extension of extra ordinary leave and the action taken on it. The request is allowed and the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 15-10-2009 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
24th September, 2009 Punjab

Sh Talwinder Singh Sarkaria versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,
r/o Fouji Di Chakki,
Backside Chowk Gurdwara Patti,
Sarkar Kot Khalsa
PO.Khalsa College,
Amritsar - 143002. __________Appellant
Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent
AC No. 321 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,complainant in person.
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser, and S.Mohinder Singh, Asstt.Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
In compliance with the Court’s orders dated 7-8-2009, the respondent has submitted a sworn affidavit concerning the destruction of records (relevant to sr. no.5) and in respect of sr. no.2, the respondent has stated that despite every effort, no trace has been found of any letter dated 23-7-2002 issued by the University to the candidates chosen for the post of security guard.
The other points at sr.nos 1, 3 & 4 and at sr. nos. 6 to 8 of the items for information mentioned in the application of the complainant have already been considered when the case was heard on the last date of hearing. It is quite clear that no further action is required to be taken in this case. The complainant, however, has made a written submission requesting for an adjournment,
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 9-10-2009 to give an opportunity to the complainant to make any further submission that he desires to make. It would not be necessary for the respondent to attend the hearings in this case till further notice.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
11th September, 2009 Punjab

RAM RATTAN Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR CWP 14054 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


DATE OF DECISION: SEPTEMBER 09, 2009

Ram Rattan .....PETITIONER
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
....RESPONDENT

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ---

Present:
Mr.Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has retired from the post of Superintendent, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar on 31.7.2009 on attaining the age of
superannuation. It is the case of the petitioner that till date the retrial benefits have not been released to him. In this regard, the petitioner has made a representation dated 25.8.2009, copy of which has been annexed with the petition as Annexure P-3. Counsel for the petitioner states that at this stage the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the
respondent to consider and decide the said representation.

In view of the above, without issuing notice to the other side as it will unnecessary delay the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider and decide the representation dated 25.8.2009 (Annexure P-3) made by the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months, in accordance with law.

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE

HARPREET KAURVsGURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and OTHERS



Ms Inder Bir Kaur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Inder Bir Kaur,
Sahib Niwas, H.No. 54, St. No.1,
Behind kamal Hospital,
Chander Colony, Tarn-Taran-143401. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 2037 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant
ii) Sh. Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar and Sh.Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
There are two applications for information of the complainant in this case dated 11-05-2009 and 15-05-2009. The respondent has informed her that she can collect the required information after depositing the prescribed fees of Rs 190/- in respect of her application dated 11-05-2009, and Rs.4/- in respect of her application dated 15-05-2009. Since, however, the amount of Rs.190/- was demanded by the respondent after more than 30 days from the date of receipt of the application dated 11-05-2009 , which is not a valid demand under the RTI Act,2005, the respondent is directed to send the information asked for by the complainant free of cost. The demand of Rs 4/- in respect of the information asked for in the application dated 15-05-2009 is valid since it was demanded vide letter dated 08-06-2009, i.e., within 30 days of the receipt of the application, and the respondent is, therefore, directed to give this information as and when Rs.4/- is deposited by the complainant..

The complainant is given an opportunity to point out deficiencies, if any, in the information supplied to her at 10 A.M on 09-10-2009 .
The respondent has informed the complainant that she may inspect the record as applied for by her during office hours on any working day.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
4th September, 2009 Punjab

GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND OTHERS Vs SIMARPREET KAUR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

R.S.A.No.3173 of 2009

Date of Decision : 01.09.2009

Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others ...Appellants
Versus
Simarpreet Kaur ...Respondent

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

Present:
Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Advocate, for the appellants.

HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
The defendants are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court, whereby the learned first Appellate Court has decreed the suit for mandatory injunction directing the appellants to declare the result of the plaintiffrespondent of M.B.A. 4th Semester examination held in May, 2004.

The said result was not declared on the ground that she has not completed requisite lectures, which alone could permit her to appear in the examination of 4th Semester. However, the plaintiff has appeared in the 4th Semester on the basis of interim order passed by this Court. It has also been found that she has attended 42 lectures, but the same were not shown while preparing the consolidated statement.

In view of the said fact, I do not not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the judgment and decree passed by the learned first
Appellate Court, which may give rise to any substantial question of law for consideration of this Court in second appeal.

Dismissed.

(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE

PARQUET FURNSHIERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P. No. 14210 of 2007

DATE OF DECISION: 27.8.2009

Parquet Furnishers Private Limited ..........Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and Ors. ..........Respondents

CORAM:-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:-
Mr. K.V. Aggarwal, Advocate for
Mr. Ashwani Gaur, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate for respondent No.3.

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral)
1. In pursuance of order dated 24.9.2008, the Secretary Education has submitted a report, which was taken on record vide order dated 12.2.2009. Objections were filed to the said report by the petitioner on 21.8.2009.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. In view of report of the Committee of experts, we do not find any ground to pass any further order in the matter.

4. The petition is dismissed.

(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE

(DAYA CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE

BALBIR SINGH GHUMAN Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 12800 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 21.08.2009

Balbir Singh Ghuman .... PETITIONER
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another ... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J.
The petitioner, who is working as Junior Engineer in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, has filed the instant petition for quashing the order dated 15.4.2005 (Annexure P-34), whereby he was re-instated in
service with immediate effect, with a recordable warning to be careful in future in performance of his duties, and his conduct was ordered to be watched by Executive Engineer (Electrical). The period of suspension was ordered to be treated as leave of kind due and duty period for all intends and purposes. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the order dated 23.2.2009 (Annexure P-43), whereby his appeal against the aforesaid order has been dismissed.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the aforesaid impugned orders.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the instant case, without holding an enquiry as per law against the petitioner, the
impugned order has been passed, therefore, the same is not sustainable, as it carries penal consequences. He submits that by the impugned order, the petitioner has been deprived of his earned leave and the said order could not have been passed. He further submits that the impugned orders passed by punishment as well as the Punishing Authority are liable to be quashed, as the same have been passed illegally and in a malafide manner, without taking into consideration the material available on the record of the enquiry file.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and do not find any force in the same. A charge sheet was
duly issued to the petitioner. In view of the initiation of the departmental proceedings, he was suspended and the Enquiry Officer was appointed. It appears that the disciplinary authority, after taking into consideration the material as well as the enquiry report, re-instated the petitioner in service with a recordable warning to be careful in future in performance of his duties. The suspension period has been ordered to be treated as leave of kind due and duty period for all intends and purposes. The Appellate Authority, after hearing the petitioner, has upheld the said order. Keeping in view the nature of punishment and the allegations against the petitioner as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to
interfere in the impugned orders, in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

Dismissed.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

Shri Jiwan Kumar versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Jiwan Kumar s/o Sh. Nathu Ram,
r/o Near Boherwala Chowk, More Mandi,
Distt. Bhatinda.
__________ Complainant
Vs.

The Public Information Oficer
o/o Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. ________________ Respondent

CC No. 1379 of 2009

Present:-
None on behalf of the complainant.

Shri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser alongwith Shri Mohinder Singh, Assistant Registrar for the respondent-department.

ORDER

Shri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser appearing on behalf of the respondent-department states that information in question has been supplied.

2. Case stands disposed of accordingly.

(R.K. Gupta)
State Information Commissioner.
Dated: 7.8.2009

Sh Talwinder Singh Sarkaria versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor , Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,
r/o Fouji Di Chakki,
Backside Chowk Gurdwara Patti,
Sarkar Kot Khalsa
PO.Khalsa College,
Amritsar - 143002. __________Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
__________ Respondent
AC No. 321 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Harjinder Singh Sarkaria, on behalf of the complainant
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The information required to be given to the complainant in response to his application dated 21-8-2008 has been found to be identical to the information required to be given in response to the application dated 13-1-2009.
Insofar as the information supplied to the complainant is concerned , the following two deficiencies have been pointed out by the complainant which needs to be rectified by the respondent:-
Sr. No. 5

No definite statement has been made by the respondent that the relevant record is not available. In case it has been destroyed, an affidavit to this effect is required to be submitted to the Commission by the officer in whose custody the record is normally kept.
Sr. no. 2

The respondent should make another effort to locate the letter dated 23-7-2002 which, according to the complainant, was a joining letter issued to the selected candidates for the post of security guard.
Adjourned to 10 A.M. on 11-9-2009 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
7th August, 2009 Punjab

VERINDER PAL SHARMA Vs DR JAIRUP SINGH VC GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY and A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.2105 of 2008

Date of Decision:30.07.2009

Verinder Pal Sharma .... petitioner
Versus
Dr.Jairup Singh, VC, Guru Nanak Dev University and anr. .....respondents

CORAM:
HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

Present:
Petitioner in person
Mr.B.S.Walia,Advocate for the respondents

RAKESH KUMAR GARG J.(ORAL):
Mr.B.S.Walia, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents has handed over two cheques amounting to Rs.1,87,437/- bearing No.865812 dated 29.07.2009 and Rs.1,11,655/- bearing No.278224 dated 28.07.2009 drawn at Punjab and Sind Bank, to the petitioner as part of 2/3 rd of the gratuity and pension amount of the
petitioner. Mr.B.S.Walia, Advocate has further stated that amount of Provident Fund and commuted pension shall be released within three weeks from today.

In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the respondent, the petitioner does not wish to press this petition, at this stage. Accordingly, rule against the respondent is discharged. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to pursue any other remedy for redressal of his grievances with regard to the payment of any balance due, according to the law.

(RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
JUDGE

SADRICK SOHANLAL Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision No. 6206 of 2008

Date of Decision 15.7.2009

Sadrick Sohanlal .... Petitioner.
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University .... Respondent

CORAM:-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

Present:-
Mr. B.R.Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. J.S.Puri, Advocate, for the respondent.

Surya Kant, J. (oral)
Petitioner is aggrieved at the order dated 21.7.2008 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amritsar whereby, in application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C, his evidence has been ordered to be closed. He is also aggrieved at the order dated 31.7.2008 dismissing his application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C moved to set aside the ex-parte eviction order dated 7.2.2005.

The petitioner had taken a shop on lease from the respondentUniversity on 4.9.2000 and claims to have surrendered possession thereof in April 2001.

On the other hand, the respondent-University filed an ejectment application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 which was allowed ex-parte against the petitioner vide order dated 7.2.2005. The respondent-University is stated to have taken possession of the premises in execution of the said ex-parte order.

Meanwhile, the petitioner moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C to set aside the ex-parte eviction order, as, according to him, the possession of the shop had already been surrendered by him in April 2001. In other wards, the petitioner wanted to dispute his liability to pay any rent to the University till it took the possession of premises by way of execution. In the said application the petitioner appears to have file his affidavit in examination in-chief, but failed to appear for his crossexamination. The Rent Controller vide one of the impugned order dated 21.7.2008, therefore, closed the petitioners evidence and than dismissed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C vide another impugned order dated 31.7.2008.

Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto learned counsel for the parties have been heard at some length.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that given one opportunity, he will lead the entire evidence at his own responsibility. He submits that the petitioner could not appear for his cross-examination for the reasons beyond his control as he was suffering from de-hydration.

Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances and the petitioners undertaking that he is willing to adduce his entire evidence at his own responsibility, I am of the considered view that let one more opportunity be granted to the petitioner to produce his remaining evidence especially when the respondent- University can be compensated with cost.

Since the petitioners application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC has been dismissed for want of evidence, the said application also deserves to reconsidered.

Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 21.7.2008 and 31.7.2008 are set aside and the Rent Controller, Amritsar is directed to grant one but last opportunity to the petitioner to produce his entire evidence at his own responsibility. The application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, thereafter, shall be decided on merits in the light of the evidence on record and uninfluenced of the previous order dated 31.7.2008. However, above given opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner subject to payment of costs of Rs.5000/- to the respondentUniversity. It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to tender the costs in Court on the first date of hearing, no such opportunity shall be granted. Parties are directed to appear before the Rent Controller on 26.8.2009.

Disposed of accordingly. Dasti.

(Surya Kant)
Judge

HARMANPREET SINGH Vs R S BAWA REGISTRAR GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AM

Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.777 of 2008

Date of Decision:07.07.2009

Harmanpreet Singh ....petitioner
Versus
R.S,Bawa, Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar .....respondent

CORAM:
HONBLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

Present:
None

RAKESH KUMAR GARG J.
The grievance of the petitioner in this contempt petition is that in spite of the directions given by this Court vide order dated 11.01.2008 in CWP No.353 of 2008, respondent No.2 has not decided the
representation of the petitioner. No one is present on behalf of the petitioner and the respondents to assist the Court. Respondents have also not filed any reply.

In view of this fact, respondent No.2 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner which was attached as Annexure P-4 with CWP No.353 of 2008 within three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. If the aforesaid representation has already been decided, respondent No.2 shall communicate the order to the petitioner.

Disposed of.

(RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
JUDGE

Sh Talwinder Singh Sarkaria versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor , Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Talwinder Singh Sarkaria,
r/o Fouji Di Chakki,
Backside Chowk Gurdwara Patti,
Sarkar Kot Khalsa
PO.Khalsa College,
Amritsar - 143002. __________Appellant
Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. __________ Respondent
AC No. 321 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of complainant
ii) Sri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The complainant has alleged in his complaint that misleading information was provided to him in response to his application for information dated 13-01-2009, which was dealt with by this Court in CC-1484/2008, and disposed of on 1-10-2008. It has been recorded in those orders that information has been provided to him except for copies of some pages of the visitor’s book of the boy’s hostel which were found to be missing. Therefore, the respondent was directed to lodge a report with the local police authorities for investigation of this theft. The respondent has confirmed today that the above mentioned orders were complied with and the report was lodged with the police, a copy of which has also been supplied to the complainant. There are two applications for information dated 13-1-2009 and 21-8-2008, with reference to which the present complaint has been made. The respondent has brought his reply to the complaint insofar as the application dated 13-1-2009 is concerned, but not the application dated 21-8-2008.
This case is adjourned to 10 AM on 7-8-2009 with a direction to the respondent to bring a copy of his reply sent to the to the complainant in response to his the application dated 21-8-2008 also, on that date. In the meanwhile, a copy of the reply of the respondent concerning the application dated 13-1-2009, submitted by him in the Court today should be sent to the complainant for his information along with these orders.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
3rd July, 2009 Punjab

PRITAM SINGH Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition. No.9362 of 2009

Decided on : 03-07-2009

Pritam Singh .... Petitioner
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others..... Respondents

CORAM:-
HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL.

Present:-
Mr. RS Bains, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
Mr. Kamaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Harmanjit Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J (Oral).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the representation submitted by the petitioner has already been decided on 23.6.2009 in compliance with the directions issued by this Court on 15.5.2009 in Civil Writ Petition No.7399 of 2009 as such, he may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition with the liberty to challenge the aforesaid order.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE

Ms Harjinder Kaur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Harjinder Kaur d/o Sh Parkash Singh
H. No.4672/24, Guru Nanakwara,
P.O. Khalsa College, Amritsar. __________ Complainant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev Univerisity, Amritsar. _____________ Respondent

CC No. 781 of 2009

Present:- Dr. Jaspal Singh on behalf of Ms. Harjinder Kaur, complainant.
Mr. Harbhajan Singh, University Legal Advisor-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

In pursuance of the order dated 8.5.2009 , the complainant has given in writing that she has seen the award list duly signed by the judges for music, theatres, dance, literary and fine arts. She further mentioned that the answer-sheets of quiz competition have not been provided. Shri Harbhajan Singh appearing on behalf of the respondent-department has brought original marks-sheets of preliminary quiz competition. He has agreed to provide the copies to the complainant. Accordingly, I hold that full information stands provided and case is disposed of.

(R.K. Gupta)
State Information Commissioner.
Dated: 5.6.2009

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION Vs STATE OF PUNJAB



BHARTI KHORA and OTHERS Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR Civil Writ Petition.7439 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: May 18, 2009

Bharti Khora and Others .....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and Another .....RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: - Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate, for the
petitioners.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue roll numbers to the petitioners who are not being allowed to take exams scheduled to commence in May/June 2009.

The regulations governing the conditions have been reproduced in Para 11 of the
petition. Admittedly, the petitioners fall short of lectures.

Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for withdrawal of the petition so as to enable the petitioners to avail of alternate remedy including approaching the authorities.

The petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE

INDERBIR KAUR MARWAHA Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and OTHERS Civil Writ Petition 7342 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: May 14, 2009

Inderbir Kaur Marwaha .....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and Others .....RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: -
Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate, with
Mr. Vikas Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
Inderbir Kaur Marwaha has approached this Court in its civil writ jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue roll number and to permit her to appear in 8th Semester Examinations, scheduled to be held in May 2009 in the course of Bachelor of Architecture.

It has been brought out that the petitioner joined the Course for 2003-2008 Academic Session. It is a semester system. The Rules governing the promotion are contained under Paragraph 4 of Annexure P-1 and read as under:-

4. Regarding Ten semester Courses:

(a) there will be no condition for students promoting from first semester to second semester.

(b) for admission in third semester, it will be necessary to pass atleast 50% course/papers but there will be no condition for promotion from third to fourth semester.

(c) for fifth semester, it will be necessary to pass atleast 50% papers of first four semester.

(d) there will be no condition for going from fifth to sixth semester.

(e) for taking admission in seventh semester, it will be necessary to pass all the exams of first two semesters.

(f) there will be no condition for going from seventh to eighth semester.

(g) admission will be given in ninth semester if papers of first four semester will be cleared.

(h) there will be no condition for going from ninth to tenth semester.

(i) after tenth semester, two years time will be given to pass all the papers and to complete the course.

It has been brought out that the petitioner, by now, has cleared 1st and 2 nd semesters.

It is further the admitted case that the petitioner has not been able to clear 3 rd , 4 th , 5 th and 6 th Semesters. Petitioner, however, has cleared all the papers of 7 th Semester. As per conditions reproduced
hereinabove, the petitioner could join 5 th Semester only if she had passed 50% of the papers of first four semesters. Clearly, the condition was not satisfied. Likewise, for taking admission in 7 th Semester, it was imperative for the petitioner to have passed all the papers of first two semesters.

At that point in time, the petitioner had not cleared the required papers, however, subsequently she cleared.

Claim of the petitioner is that for promotion from 7th to 8 th Semester, there is no condition as is made out from Para 4(f). The petitioner prays for the relief as given hereinabove.

It seems that the respondents did not take note of the requirement and allowed the petitioner to join the next semester without her clearing the earlier semesters, as required under the Rules. The respondents kept on accepting the fees. At this point in time, the Rule has beeninvoked.

Case set up by learned counsel for the petitioner is that under Para 4(f), since there is no condition for promotion to 8th Semester, therefore, the petitioner has a right and the respondents cannot raise the issue viz., the petitioner has not cleared earlier examinations.

It remains undisputed that the petitioner could not have been promoted to 3rd Semester or the 7 th
Semester under the Rules.

Learned counsel states that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn to enable the petitioner to pursue her case before the Vice Chancellor who has already been approached by way of filing a representation, Annexure P-10.

The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue her case before the Vice Chancellor.

In view of the ensuing examinations, it is directed that representation (Annexure P-10) be disposed of within one week of receipt of copy of this order.

Copy of the order be given under signatures of the Reader.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE

Ms Harjinder Kaur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Ms. Harjinder Kaur d/o Sh Parkash Singh
H. No.4672/24, Guru Nanakwara,
P.O. Khalsa College, Amritsar.
__________ Complainant
Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o the Guru Nanak Dev Univerisity, Amritsar. _____________ Respondent

CC No. 781 of 2009

Present:-
Dr. Jaspal Singh on behalf of Ms. Harjinder Kaur, complainant.
Mr. Harbhajan Singh, University Legal Advisor-cum-APIO alongwith Shri Lakhbir Singh, Assitant Registrar on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

Dr. Jaspal Singh confirmed that the result demanded by him at Sr. No.2 of his complaint has been provided to him. As regards information at Sr. No.3 i.e names of the Judges and their telephone numbers is unwarranted and not to be supplied to the complainant. As regards information about Sr. No.1 and 4, the complainant can visit the office of Director, Youth Welfare, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar on 20.5.2009 at 11.00 A.M. and see the answer sheet of the Quiz Competition in respect of his college and other two colleges i.e. Ramgarhia College of Education, Jalandhar and M.G.N. College of Education, Jalandhar. He can only pursue the information and not take copies of the same.

2. Case stands adjourned to 5.6.2009.


(R.K. Gupta)
State Information Commissioner.
Dated: 8.5.2009

BALBIR SINGH GHUMAN Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER CWP 15179 of 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

( OandM )

DATE OF DECISION : 01.05.2009

Balbir Singh Ghuman .... PETITIONER
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Lalit Rishi, Advocate, for
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate, for the respondents.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
Counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the fact that now vide order dated 23.2.2009, the Syndicate of the respondent-University has rejected the appeal, filed by the petitioner against the order dated 15.4.2005, therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to challenge the said order. Counsel for the respondents states that the respondents have no objection to the same.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

Dina Nath Parsad versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Dina Nath Parsad,
135/5, Colony, 516 Quarters,
Ghanu pur, Khand Wala, Chheharta,
Amritsar.
__________Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.

__________ Respondent

AC No. 92 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Dina Nath Parsad appellant in person.
ii) Sh. Lakhbir Singh, Assistant Registrar & S. Harbhajan Singh Advocate, on behalf of the respondent

ORDER
Heard.
Arguments in this case were heard on 06.04.2009 and judgment was reserved.

2. Vide application dated 15.09.2008, made by the Appellant to the Respondent, he demanded copies of the “thesis submitted by Ms. Sukhwinder Kaur Bath and Kiranjot Kaur for their M.Phil Degree in Hindi in 1987, 1988 & 1989.” The request made by the Appellant has been declined by the Respondent, vide his communication dated 08.12.2008, stating that the thesis in question is of confidential nature and, therefore, its copies cannot be supplied under the RTI Act 2005. It is however, mentioned in this letter that the Appellant could go through the thesis in question, on any working day, in the library of the department, and for this purpose, he may contact the Head of the Department of Hindi. The Appellant, vide his communication dated 30.12.2008, has controverted this plea of the Respondent by stating that the information sought by him is not of confidential nature and that it is not exempt from disclosure under any of the clauses of Section 8 (1). Having failed to persuade the PIO as well as the first Appellate Authority to accede to his request, the Appellant has approached the Commission by way of second appeal under Section 19 of the Act.

3. At the time of arguments, the submission made on behalf of the Respondent is that the information sought by the Appellant is not accessible to him under the RTI Act 2005. According to him, the request by the Appellant does not even amount to information as envisaged under the Act. Another submission of the Respondent is that the information sought by the Appellant stands exempted from disclosure by virtue of the operation of clauses (e) and (j) of Section 8 (1) as also Section 11.

4. On the other hand the Appellant submits that a public authority can only deny to a citizen, information that is exempt from disclosure under Sections 8 or 9 of the Act. According to him, the right to information of a citizen is not subject to any other limitation. He submits that the demand made by him does not fall under any of the clauses of Section 8 (1) or Section 9. Regarding Section 11, he submits that it is merely a procedural provision giving a third party a right of hearing while deciding the request for information pertaining to the said third party.

5. The arguments submitted by the applicant and the respondent have been carefully considered. I find that the thesis of a student has nothing to do with the working or the functioning of the University and cannot be described as part of the official records of the University. It is rather an intellectual property of the student who has authored it. While, therefore, it can be accessed for reference and research purposes by a member of the public in the library of the University, the delivery of a copy of the entire thesis to an applicant under the RTI Act would harm the competitive position of the student who has written the thesis, since the student may contemplate its publication in the future as a priced book, and therefore the information required by the complainant is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act.

6. For the above reasons, the submissions made by the appellant in this case are rejected and this complaint is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner,
Punjab
22nd April, 2009

BALJIT SINGH Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P. No.11552 of 2008

DATE OF DECISION: MARCH 27, 2009

Baljit Singh .....PETITIONER
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others ....RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr.S.K. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.J.S. Puri, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Respondent No.3 exparte.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J.
The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the appointment of Jagdish Singh (respondent No.3) on the post of Mason, Grade-II (Construction Department) with a further direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner on the said post.

The petitioner had applied for the post of Mason Grade-II (Construction Department) in Guru Nanak Dev University in pursuance of advertisement No.3/2007 (Annexure P1). By the said advertisement, one post of Mason, Grade-II within Construction Department on contractual basis for three years for a fixed pay of Rs.5000/- per month, was advertised by the respondent-University. The petitioner was found duly eligible for the said post and vide letter dated 31.1.2008 he was called to appear on 5.2.2008 for practical test. The petitioner appeared for the said test and cleared the same. Thereafter, vide letter dated 29.2.2008, which was sent to the petitioner on the address given by him in his Application Form, he was called for interview which was to be held on 4.3.2008. It is the case of the
petitioner that he received the said letter on 5.3.2008, therefore, he could not appear for the said interview, which was to be held on 4.3.2008. It is further the case of the petitioner that respondent-authorities deliberately sent the interview letter late to the petitioner with intention to deprive him of his right for selection to the aforesaid post.

Pursuant to the notice issued, a written statement has been filed by respondents No.1 and 2 in which it has been stated the respondents dispatched the call letters for interview, which was to be held on 4.3.2008,
to all the three candidates, who had cleared the practical test, simultaneously on the same day, i.e., 29.2.2008 by Speed Post. The allegation that the respondents sent the call letters for interview late with
mala fide intention, was totally denied. It is stated that there is no reason for alleging any discrimination or mala fide on the part of the answering respondents. It has been further stated that the call letter of the petitioner
was dispatched by Speed Post on the address provided by the petitioner
himself in the Application Form. It has been further stated that village Sanoure is a very prominent and big village neighbouring Patiala. It has been further stated that the petitioner has not annexed any proof regarding
the date of receipt of the call letter.

The petitioner filed replication to the written statement filed by respondents No.1 and 2. In the replication, it has been stated that full address of the petitioner, which was mentioned in the Application Form, was not mentioned in the call letter sent to him. It is to be mentioned that with the replication also the petitioner did not annex any proof, evidence or document showing that he had received the call letter on 5.3.2008, except
mere averments made by him in the writ petition.

I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record of the case. Undisputedly, all the three candidates, who had cleared the Practical Test for the above-said post, were sent the call letters simultaneously on 29.2.2008 for interview to be held on 4.3.2008, by Speed Post on the addresses given by the candidates in their Application Forms.

The call letter for interview was also sent to the petitioner by the respondents on 29.2.2008 on the address given by him in his Application
Form along with his Mobile number. It is the case of the petitioner that he
received the said letter on 5.3.2008, but neither along with his petition nor
along his replication, the petitioner has annexed any cogent evidence, proof or documents showing that he had received the said letter on 5.3.2008. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents No.1 and 2 have not denied this factum, cannot be accepted.

In the written statement, the respondents have categorically stated that the petitioner be put to strict proof regarding date of receipt of call letter as nothing is discernible from the documents attached with the writ petition.

While filing the replication, the petitioner again did not annex the proof for receipt of the said letter on 5.3.2008. In my opinion, the petitioner could have easily produced the Certificate from the Postal authorities about the date of delivery of the said letter. However, the same has not been produced by the petitioner.

Furthermore, it cannot be said that in the facts and circumstances of the
case, the respondents deliberately dispatched the call letter for interview
late. In my opinion, the call letters dispatched simultaneously to all the three candidates by Speed Post, including the petitioner, on 29.2.2008 for
attending the interview on 4.3.2008, cannot be said to be dispatched late,
particularly when all the three candidates were the residents of the State of
Punjab. In the normal course, a Speed Post, which is a Government of India undertaking under the Department of Posts, takes just one day to reach from Amritsar to Patiala. It is not the case of the petitioner that the call letters for interview were sent by respondents No.1 and 2 by ordinary post.

Rather, the same were sent by Speed Post through government agency.

Therefore, it cannot be said that in the instant case the call letters for interview were dispatched deliberately in a short time. Thus the appointment of respondent No.3 on the post of Mason can not be quashed
on the aforesaid ground. A Division Bench judgment in Meenakshi Singla v. State of Punjab and others, 1993(1) SLR 609, cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable. In that case, the person was not called for interview, though he was found eligible, but another candidate, who was less qualified, was selected and appointed. The instant case is entirely different case where the candidate himself did not appear for the interview, though the call letter for interview was dispatched to him well within the time. Thus, in my opinion, the said decision, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is not applicable to this case.

In view of the above, there is no merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE


Rajni Verma versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Rajni Verma,
D/o Sri Dharam Pal Verma,
1288, Urban Estate,
Phase-I,
Jalandhar -------- Complainant
Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar ….. ----Respondent

CC No. 1821 of 2008

Present:
i) Dr. Rajni Verma, complainant in person.
ii) Sh. Harbhajan Singh, Advocate and Sh. Lakhbir Singh, Asst. Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
In compliance with the Court’s orders dated 15-10-2008, the information described in the five items mentioned in the orders has been provided by the respondent to the complainant in the Court today. The information has been checked and found to be correct by the complainant.
Disposed of.

(P.K. Verma)
State Information Commissioner
November 7, 2008 Punjab

sh hansa singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Hansa Singh,
S/o Sh. Gurdas Singh,
R/o Sultani, Post Office Behrampur,
Gurdaspur (Pb.).
…………………Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o, Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
………………Respondent

CC No. 2118 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) S. Harbhajan Singh, Advocate and S. Lakhbir Sin gh, Asstt. Registrar, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The respondent has informed the complainant that Sri Baldev Singh is a daily wage employee and there is nothing on record of the University about any misconduct that has been committed by him or any inquiry which may be pending and proceeding against him, but the present complaint of the complainant against this employee has been placed before the University authorities for necessary action.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 31, 2008 Punjab

Sh Raghubir Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Raghubir Singh,
D-7, 251, St. No. ' 6,
Azad Nagar (Kot Khalsa),
Amritsar ' 143002.
…………………Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o, Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
………………Respondent
CC No. 2011 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) .Sri Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar and Sri Harbhajan Singh, Advocate,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The information required by the complainant has been sent to him by the respondent vide their letter dated 8-7-2008. The LTC claimed by Dr.(Mrs) Radha Sharma was found to be in accordance with the University Rules. As per the records of the University her name was approved for appointment as Professor, MRS Chair, by the syndicate during the year 2001-02. Information regarding the constitution of the Syndicate for the year 2001-02, particularly with reference to its meeting on 20-7-2001 has already been provided to the complainant in CC- 1562 /2008.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 24, 2008 Punjab

Rajni Verma versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Rajni Verma,
D/o Sri Dharam Pal Verma,
1288, Urban Estate,
Phase-I,
Jalandhar -------- Complainant
Vs.
Public Information Officer ,
O/o The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar ----Respondent

CC No. 1821 of 2008
Present: Dr. Rajni Verma, complainant in person.

ORDER

Heard.
The complainant states that the information which has been asked for in her applications dated 30-6-2008 and 22-7-2008 do not concern a third party because she has been placed under suspension and charge sheeted on the basis of the allegation that she deleted the name of Ms. Suman Agnihotri, a student admitted to the LLM course of the GNDU, from the attendance register, which was an act of sabotage. In response to one of her applications for information dated 22-7-2008, the complainant has been given the information about the basis on which she was suspended, in which a copy of the report of the Dean, College Development Council of the University, which was considered by the Syndicate of the University, has been supplied to her. In this report, it has been recorded that the default found against the complainant is on the basis of the statements given against her by Miss Suman Agnihotri, Dr. Rajinder Marwaha, Mr. Varinder Sigh and Miss Harvinder Kaur before the Committee constituted to inquire into the question of attendance of Ms. Suman Agnihotri.

The complainant was subsequently charge sheeted and since her date of suspension and after she was charge sheeted, she has been asking the University for copies of the statements made by these four persons before the members of the aforementioned Committee, but the same has been repeatedly denied to her. I find that the denial of this information by the respondent is against not only the provisions of the RTI Act, but also all principles of natural justice and fair play. It is not understood how the University expects the complainant to prepare a proper reply to the charge sheet given to her, or defend herself properly, unless she is supplied copies of the statements given by her colleagues on the basis of which the entire edifice of allegations has been built against her,` from the report of the Dean, to the resolution of the Syndicate, to her suspension and charge sheet.
There is no provision of the RTI Act under which the respondent can deny the information which the complainant requires and therefore, I direct that the PIO, office of the Registrar, GNDU, Amritsar shall give the following information to the complainant within seven days of the date of receipt of these orders, in response to the applications for information made by the complainant on 30-6-2008 and 22-7-2008:-

1. The report submitted by the Committee Members namely Dr. M.S.Dhillon & Dr. Chahal regarding attendance of Ms. Suman Agnihotri in LL.M Course,
2. Statement of Ms. Suman Agnihotri given before the Committee members.
3. Statement of Dr. Rajinder Marwaha given before the Committee members.
4. Statement of Mr. Varinder Singh given before the Committee members.
5. Statement of Miss Harvinder Kaur, Steno, given before the Committee members.

The “Committee” referred to in the above orders is the Committee constituted on 22-5-2008 by the Vice Chancellor of the GNDU to look into the matter of attendance of Miss. Suman Agnihotri.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 7-11-2008 for confirmation of compliance. The PIO or the concerned APIO should be present in the Court on that date along with a copy of the information supplied to the complainant.
Copies of the applications for information of the complainant, referred to in the above orders, and a copy of the complaint of the complainant dated 13-8-2008 made to the Commission, are enclosed with these orders for ready reference of the respondent.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 15, 2008 Punjab

Raghbir Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34 , Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Raghbir Singh,
D-7, 251, Street No. 6,
Azad Nagar (Kot Khalsa)
Amritsar-143002 …….. Complainant

V/s.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar
……….Respondent

CC No. 1562 of 2008

Present:
i) Dr. Raghbir Singh, complainant in person
ii)Sri Lakhbir Singh, Asst. Registrar and Sri Harbhajan Singh,Legal Adviser, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The information required by the complainant vide his application for information dated nil has been provided in full by the respondent vide his letter dated 22-4-2008. The position regarding the constitution of the Syndicate w.e.f.
1-7-2001 has also been intimated by the respondent to the complainant vide his letter dated 2-9-2008, in compliance with the orders of the Court dated 7-8-2008.
No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
September 11, 2008 Punjab


Sh Randeep Bhagat versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Randeep Bhagat,
11, Pawan Nagar,
Near Post office, Amritsar.
________ Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar.
__________ Respondent
AC No. 267 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sri Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar,and Sri Harbhajan Singh, Advocate, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent in this case has denied the information required by the complainant on the ground that it concerns the personal service record of Ms. Parveen Kumari, daughter of Sri Raj Kumar, and is therefore exempted from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The complainant went in 1st appeal to the 1st Appellate Authority, who concurred with the PIO. The application for information of the appellant dated 25-4-2008 has been considered and discussed with the respondent in the Court today. As a result thereof, I rule that point nos. 1,3,& 5, out of the six points mentioned in the application, are not covered by section 8(1)(j), since the appointment of a person to a post within the University is neither personal nor confidential. Therefore, I direct the respondent to give the information required by the complainant mentioned against these three points. Insofar as the remaining points of the application are concerned, I agree with the respondent that the information sought for is exempted from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
August 8, 2008 Punjab

Raghbir Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34 , Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Dr. Raghbir Singh,
D-7, 251, Street No. 6,
Azad Nagar (Kot Khalsa)
Amritsar-143002
…….. Complainant
V/s.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar
……….Respondent

CC No. 1562 of 2008

ORDER
The complaint of Dr. Raghbir Singh, dated 2-7-2008, has been considered. A copy of the same is enclosed.

The only point on which action is required to be taken by the respondent, is with regard to point no. 1 of his application for information. The respondent is directed to send to the complainant a copy of the notification/order issued by the Guru Nanak Dev University, constituting the Syndicate of the University for the year 2001-02 w.e.f. 1.7.2001. A copy of the communication sent to the complainant along with a copy of the concerned notification may be sent to the Commission as well. If the respondent, for any reason, is unable to comply with these orders, he or the concerned APIO is directed to be present in the Court on the next date of hearing.

Apart from the above, the other points mentioned in the complaint are disposed of as follows:-

1. The respondent has already adequately explained to the complainant the reasons for inviting only eleven members in the meeting of the Syndicate held on 20-7-2001.

2. The contention of the respondent that names of the paper setters of the PMT,2005 can not be disclosed to the application for information under the RTI Act, is upheld.

Adjourned to 10 AM on September 11, 2008 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma) State Information Commissioner,
Punjab.
August 7 ,2008

SUNIL KUMAR Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY Civil Writ Petition 12067 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 16.07.2008

Sunil Kumar ........Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University .......Respondent

Coram:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR

Present:
Mr. P S Dhaliwal Advocate for the petitioner

A SHUTOSH MOHUNTA J. (Oral)
The petitioner has prayed for quashing of suspension order dated 04.05.2007 (Annexure P2) as well as charge sheet dated 10.05.2007 (Annexure P3) issued by the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in a criminal case registered against the petitioner he was found to be innocent by the DSP P S Sadar Amritsar. As regards quashing of the suspension of orders as well as the charge sheet in question are concerned the final decision would have to be taken by the respondents itself and this Court cannot pass any order in this regard at this stage.

Counsel for the petitioner prays that the respondents be directed to decide the inquiry pending against him expeditiously.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to take a final decision on the charge-sheet issued to the petitioner and decide the matter in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

[ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA]
JUDGE

[NIRMALJIT KAUR]
JUDGE

Kuldeep Singh Kahlon versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kuldeep Singh Kahlon,
E-13/38,Gali No. 5,
Shakti Nagar ,Khandwala,
Chheharta, Amritsar ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar _________ Respondent

CC No. 564 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Kuldeep Singh Kahlon, complainant in person.
ii) Sh. Harbhajan Singh, Advocate and Shri Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar, on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard.
The respondent has made a written submission that sincere efforts have been made to locate the B.Ed entrance test prospectus of July, 1990 from all possible sources but the same could not be located. The complainant on the other hand states that he has a copy of the required prospectus in his possession and his purpose would be served if the respondent would attest it.
The complainant should visit the office of the respondent along with a copy of the prospectus in his possession and after proper examination of the same, the respondent should consider the complainant’s request for attesting the same.
Disposed of
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated 12th June, 2008

TUSHAR VIJAN Vs G N D UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 8653 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: May 21 2008

TUSHAR VIJAN ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

PRESENT: MR. RAMESH SHARMA ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA J.(ORAL)
Learned counsel submits that the punishment of disqualification for a period of 2 years to appear in any examination is highly excessive as the petitioner had not written anything from the material of which he was in possession.

We have perused the impugned order (Annexures P-4) and the order (Annexure P-6) vide which the petitioner was informed with regard to rejection of his appeal. On perusal we find that the Unfair Means Committee has returned a finding of fact that the petitioner has used unfair means in furtherance of his examination. However as the petitioner is a student of 10th Semester of LL.B. (Five Year Course) therefore we are inclined to take a lenient view in the matter.

In view of the above we modify the orders (Annexure P-4 and P- 6) to the extent that the petitioner would be disqualified for a period of 1 year instead of 2 years as ordered by the Unfair Means Committee and affirmed by the appellate authority. This shall however be not taken as a precedent.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE

ANTARPREET SINGH Vs. GURU NANAK DEV UNIV AND ORS CWP 7871 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: May 15, 2008

ANTARPREET SINGH ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY, ...RESPONDENTS AMRITSAR and ORS.

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

PRESENT:
MR. R.D. BAWA, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER.
MR. D.S. PATWALIA, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL)
The present writ petition has been filed praying that a writ in
the nature of mandamus be issued directing the respondent-University to issue Roll Number and allow the petitioner to appear in 2nd Semester of Bachelor of Sciences (Hons. School), 2008. We had issued notice of motion. Counsel appearing for the University has stated that the petitioner had failed in paper of Computer Applications in the mandatory Mid- Semester Test held by the University. It has been urged by the counsel for the University that since the petitioner has failed and had secured 11 marks out of 70, whereas a candidate is required to obtain 25 marks in each paper and 40% in aggregate, therefore, he is ineligible to appear in the examination, Counsel for the petitioner has urged that number of students, as one Priyanka who had not passed were allowed to appear in the examination. This fact has been controverted by the counsel for the University who stated that those students who were absent, a special test
was held and they have passed the examination. Therefore, the case of the petitioner cannot be compared with the instances and names of the candidates mentioned in the writ petition.

We cannot cure the ineligibility. The petitioner had failed in
one paper and for appearing in the 2nd Semester, it is insisted by the counsel for the University that the petitioner should pass the examination. No mala fides have been levelled, therefore, action of the University is in accordance
with the rules prescribed. We find no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE

Kuldeep Singh Kahlon versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Kuldeep Singh Kahlon,
E-13/38,Gali No. 5,
Shakti Nagar ,Khandwala,
Chheharta, Amritsar ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar
_________ Respondent
CC No. 564 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Kuldeep Singh Kahlon, complainant in person.
ii) Sh Harbhajan Singh, Advocate and Shri Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar-cum-PIO.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has raised two objections to the application for information dated 11-1-2008 of the complainant:-

1. The respondent states that the information asked for against sr. no. 2 of the application namely, the category, SC, BC or General, to which Sh. Bhupinder Singh, one of the successful candidates, belongs, is personal information and is exempted from being given under section 8( I )( j ). This objection of the respondent is upheld.
2. The respondent states that the information which has been asked is 18 years old and they have with great difficulty managed to obtain only a copy of the entire result of the competitive entrance examination for admission to the B.Ed course which was held in July, 1990, but it will take further time and effort to locate the precise information asked for at sr. no. 1 of the complainant’s application and to find a copy of the prospectus which was issued for this particular examination, which he has asked for against sr. no. 3 of his application.

Since the information which has been asked for is undoubtedly 18 years old, a period of one more month is given to the respondent to locate the required information and give it to the complainant.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 12-6-2008 for confirmation of compliance.


(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
9th May 2008

TUSHAR VIJAN Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIV AND ORS CWP 7621 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: May 8, 2008

TUSHAR VIJAN ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

PRESENT:
MR. RAMESH SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL)
The petitioner is aggrieved against the order (Annexure P-3)
vide which he has been disqualified from appearing in any examination for a period of 2 years by the Unfair Means Committee of Guru Nanak Dev University. Against the aforementioned orders the petitioner preferred an appeal (Annexure P-4) which is still pending.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.1 to decide the appeal (Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Copy of the order be given under the signatures of the Court
Secretary.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE

JASPREET SINGH Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNI and ANR Civil Writ Petition 6296 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Misc. No.8588 of 2008 with

Date of decision: 1st May, 2008

Jaspreet Singh … Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University and another … Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Amrik Singh Kalra, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. R.S.Bajaj, Advocate for the respondents.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J.
CM No.8588 of 2008
Allowed. Replication to the written statement filed by respondent No.2 is taken on record.

C WP No. 6 296 of 2008
The present writ petition has been filed by Jaspreet Singh, a student of Lovely Institute of Law, Lovely Campus, Chhehru, Phagwara, District Kapurthala, against Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar (respondent No.1) and Lovely Institute of Law (respondent No.2). It has been prayed that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the respondent No.1 to issue roll number to the petitioner and he be also permitted to appear in the examination of second year LL.B. course which is to commence from first week of May, 2008.

On the prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition, notice of motion has been issued. Respondent-college has filed no written
statement.

It has been stated that petitioner got admission in the first year of LL.B. three year course in the year 2006. In first year examination held in April 2007, result was not declared and the next session started on 30th April, 2007. Since, the result was not declared, the students were allowed to undertake classes of the second year. Result was declared on 5th September, 2007 and the petitioner, out of papers of seven subjects, passed only in two subjects. Therefore, he was not eligible for promotion to the second year. Therefore, he was stopped from attending the classes.

Petitioner applied for re-evaluation and the result of the re-evaluation was received in the college on 14th January, 2008 and same was displayed on the notice board of the college and petitioner was telephonically informed about the result. It has been further averred in the written statement as under:

However, petitioner never came to the college to apply for re-admission within 10 days of the declaration of the said result. Subsequently, the Detail Mark Card (DMC) of various candidates including the petitioner were received by the answering respondent from the Respondent University on 21.01.2008 in the Central Registry of the Institute and by the Law Department of the Institute on 22.01.2008. Again petitioner was informed telephonically about the receipt of the said DMCs. Petitioner thereafter approached the answering respondent on 23.01.2008 and collected his DMC after putting his signatures in the register maintained for the said purpose.

Since petitioner was not eligible to join the second year LL.B. course, he having not applied for re-admission within 10 days of declaration of result of re-evaluation, he submitted an application on 23.01.2008 itself for refund of his fees. Though there is no provision for refund of fees, taking compassionate view, his request for refund of fees was allowed and he was refunded a sum of Rs.18,650/- without deducting even a single penny. Now after passage of such a long time, petitioner cannot be allowed to turn around and take the plea that he should be allowed to appear in the second year examination of LL.B. commencing w.e.f. 06.05.2008.

Moreover, petitioner does not fulfill the criteria of attending a minimum of 66% lectures as prescribed by the Respondent University to be eligible for appearing in the 2nd year LL.B.
exams.

We have heard counsel for the parties. Since the petitioner has taken refund of the fee and had not attended classes, on account of shortage of lectures, he is not entitled to the relief sought.

Therefore, the present writ petition is dismissed being devoid of any merit.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE

[ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA]
JUDGE

SIDDHARTHA SHARMA Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIV AND ORS Civil Writ Petition 7077 of 2008

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh.

Date of Decision: 30.4.2008

Siddharatha Sharma …Petitioner
Versus
and Others. …Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HONBLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Hari Pal Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ashutosh Mohunta, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been debarred from appearing in any examination for two years as he had used unfair means while appearing in the fifth semester examination in the B.Tech (Food Sciences and Technology) Course.

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has not been given copy of report of the Unfair Means Committee and hence right of petitioner to file an appeal under Regulation 20 has been taken away.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we direct the Chairman of the Unfair Means Committee to give copy of the report, vide which the petitioner has been held guilty, within two weeks. On receipt of report, the petitioner may, if so advised, to file an appeal against the same before the appropriate authority.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Ashutosh Mohunta)
Judge

(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia)
Judge

PARMINDER KAUR Vs G N D U AND ORS Civil Writ Petition 14311 of 2007



HARPREET KAUR Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ORS C W P 4750 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH


Date of Decision: April 11,2008

Harpreet Kaur ....................................................Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, through its Registrar and others ......................... Respondents

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia

Present:
Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Advocate for the respondents.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.
The petitioner has prayed for setting aside the letters/orders dated 18.1.2008 (Annexure P1) and 4.3.2008 (Annexure P2) vide which she has been debarred from appearing in the M.A. Ist year (Economics) examination to be held in April 2008.

The petitioner took admission in B.A. Ist year in Mata Sarup Rani Government College for Girls, Amritsar, in the year 2004. In April 2007, the petitioner appeared in B.A. Part-III examination and she got a compartment in the subject of Mathematics. In July 2007 the petitioner applied for admission in M.A. Ist year (Economics) as a private candidate. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the calendar of the Guru Nanak Dev University a candidate is eligible to appear in the M.A. Part-I examination provided such a candidate clears the paper in which she has got a
compartment.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had reappeared for compartment in the subject of Mathematics and cleared the same in September 2007 by securing 107 marks out of 200 marks and as such she is eligible to re-appear in the M.A. Part-I examination in Economics. It is contended by the learned counsel that the letters Annexures P1 and P2 holding the petitioner to be ineligible for sitting in the M.A. Ist year (Economics) examination to be held in April 2008 are liable to be quashed.

Counsel for the petitioner has relied on Provision 11 of the
Guru Nanak Dev University Calendar which stipulates the criterion regarding eligibility for appearing in the examination of M.A. Part-I. On the basis of the aforementioned criterion, the petitioner claims that she be
allowed to appear in the M.A. Part-I examination in Economics.

Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been averred that Provision 11 of the Guru Nanak Dev University Calendar has been amended in the meeting of the Syndicate held on 11.10.2004 and as per the amended Regulations a candidate like the petitioner having compartment in Undergraduate or Graduate Course will not be eligible to take examination for Masters Degree Course for Academic Session 2005-2006. This policy has been implemented from the Academic Session 2005-2006.

Counsel for the respondents has contended that a candidate who has a compartment at Graduation level would not be eligible for admission in any Post Graduate Course after 2005-2006. Learned counsel further contends that as the petitioner had sought admission in M.A. Part-I (Economics) as a private candidate in July 2007, therefore, as per the amended Regulations the petitioner would not be entitled to admission.

We have heard the counsel for the parties at length.

A perusal of the facts of this case clearly shows that the petitioner had got a compartment in the subject of Mathematics while appearing in B.A. Part-III examination.

As per the Eligibility Criterion which was amended in the meeting of the Syndicate dated 11.10.2004 a candidate who has got a compartment at Graduation level would not be eligible for admission in any Post Graduate Course after 2005-2006. Thus, the petitioner who had applied as a private candidate in M.A. Part-I (Economics) was not even eligible to get admission in the said Course till such time she cleared her compartment. Although the petitioner had cleared the supplementary examination in the month of September 2007, yet she has rightly been held ineligible to appear in the M.A. Part-I Examination as she was not even entitled to be given admission in M.A. Part-I.

For the foregoing reasons, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner has rightly been held ineligible for appearing in the M.A. Ist year (Economics) examination and, resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed.

( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA )
JUDGE

( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
JUDGE

K S Gill and another Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others CIVIL WRIT PETITION 17531 OF 2007

DECIDED ON : 02-04-2008

K.S.Gill & another ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & others ....Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr.J.V.Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioners
Mr.Yatinder Sharma, DAG, Punjab

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J (ORAL)
The petitioners joined the services of respondent No.3-
College on 07-07-1969 and 09-08-1971 respectively and retired on 28-02- 2003 and 31-08-2004 as Lecturers. They have prayed that directions be issued to the respondents to release their retiral dues which also include leave encashment, payment of arrears on acount of revision of pay-scales with effect from 01-01-1996, payment of dues of allowances such as DA, HRA,Medical Allowance at par with the employees of the Punjab Government and other retiral dues. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this case is squarely covered by the decision rendered in CWP 3583 of 2007 in K.C.Sharma versus State of Punjab & others on 17-12- 2007 wherein the same issues were involved and which relates to the same college.

We have perused the impugned judgement and are of the
considered opinion that this case is squarely covered by the aforementioned judgement.

In view of the above, we allow this writ petition in the same
terms as that of K.C.Sharma's case (supra) In case the payments are not made to the petitioners in terms of the directions issued in K.C.Sharma's case, then the respondents shall be liable to pay interest @ 6% per annum to the petitioner.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge

CWP 16955 of 2007
Present:
Mr.M.S.Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr.Jatyender Sharma, DAG, Punjab
Mr.P.K.Khurana, Advocate, for the respondent- University
Reply on behalf of respondent has been filed in Court today.

The same is taken on record.

A perusal of the reply shows that the petitioner has the
alternative remedy of challenging the decision of the committee by filing an appeal under Rule 20 of Part II Chapter 10 of Volume III, Calender of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar before the Vice Chancellor.

As the aforementioned remedy is available to the petitioner, therefore, he may challenge in the order impugned in this case before the Vice Chancellor. The delay in filing the appeal shall be condoned in case the appeal is filed within one month from today.

Disposed of.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge

IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

CIVIL WRIT PETITION 16491 OF 2007

DATE OF DECISION : 02-04-2008

Sikander Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & others ....Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH

AHLUWALIA
Present:
Mr.B.S.Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr.Yatinder Sharma, DAG, Punjab
Mr.R.S.Rai, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Meenakshi Dogra, Advocate, for respondent No.5

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J (ORAL)
The petitioner has prayed that directions be issued to the
respondents to release the pension, gratuity, leave encashment and other remaining retiral benefits. The petitioner retired from service of Municipal Council, Maur, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, district Bathinda on 30-06-2007. As
he has not been paid his retiral dues, hence he has filed this writ petition.

Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the
petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs.2,50,000 and the remaining amount would be paid to him in due course of time as the Municipal Council is going through financial crunch.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.5 to pay the entire retiral dues of the petitioner to him within a period of 4 months from today. In the meantime, we direct the State of Punjab to release grants to Municipal
Council, Maur, expeditiously so that Municipal Council could discharge its liability towards its retired employees.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge

IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

CIVIL WRIT PETITION 16887 OF 2007

DATE OF DECISION : 02-04-2008

Dr.Gurmohan Singh Ahluwalia ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & others ....Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH
AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr.G.P.Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr.Jatyender Sharma, DAG, Punjab
Mr.Sandeep Arora, Advocate, for respondents 3 and 4

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J (ORAL)
Reply has been filed on behalf of respondents 3 and 4 today in Court which is taken on record.

The petitioner has prayed that directions be issued to the
respondents to pay him the gratuity, leave encashment and remaining part of provident fund ,arrears of salary of revised pay scales and corresponding increase of GPF, DA, HRA,Medical Allowance and other dues in accordance with law.

The petitioner after serving in Gujrawala Guru Nanak Khalsa College, Ludhiana,for about 37 years retired on 31-05-2007.

However, he has not been granted the full retiral dues as mentioned above.

Reply on behalf of respondents 3 and 4 has been filed and it has been averred that the petitioner has been paid the entire gratuity. It is further averred that as far as payment of other retiral dues is concerned as the College is a privately aided college to the extent of 95% , hence as long as the State of Punjab does not release grants to them, they are unable to pay to the petitioner.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that as far as an employee is concerned, he is to be paid his retiral dues of the College who may claim the amount paid to the employee from the State Government. Reliance in this regard is placed upon K.C.Sharma versus State of Punjab & others decided on 17-12- 2007 in CWP 3583 of 2007 which squarely covers the controversy involved in the present case.

In view of the above, we allow this petition in the same terms as in K.C.Sharma's case (supra).

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge

SIKANDER SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CRIMINAL APPEAL 589 SB OF 1996

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DECIDED ON : 28-11-2007

Beni ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ....Respondent
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER
Present:
Mr.Bipan Ghai Advocate for the petitioner
Ms.Shalini Atri AAG Haryana

MAHESH GROVER J (ORAL)
On 13-06-1993 an incident took place in which Kishan Pal lost his life. Initially he was admitted to B.K.Hospital in Fardiabad and thereafter moved to Safderjang Hospital in Delhi. The police who had got information while on the way to the hospital at Delhi met Raj Palcomplainant who made a statement that they were 8 brothers and his brother Kishan Pal and Brahm Chand had been residing in House No.1 B WH-29 NIT Faridabad and they were engaged in the business of dairy farming. His another brother Rajbir who was residing at Sanjay Colony in Sector 23 Faridabad had come to meet his brother Kishan Pal. On a date prior to the occurrence i.e. on 12-06-1993 at about 7-30 pm. Jagat Singh who is also engaged in the same business came to the dairy of Kishan Pal and asked him as to why he was attracting his customers and affecting his business adversely. On the day of the occurrence the complainant and his brother Kishan Pal milked the buffaloes and thereafter Kishan Pal went from the dairly to supply the milk at about 7AM while the complainant went for a walk. When he reached the park there he saw Kishan Pal who was about to take a turn in the street and then Jagat Singh Satish Lal Chand and Beni accused intercepted him. All the four persons were armed with lathis in their hands. Jagat Singh asked the other accused to kill Kishan Pal.

Beni the present appellant is said to have given a lathi blow on the head of Kishan Pal from behind as a result of which he fell down. The complainant reached his brother and raised a noise whereupon Satishaccused gave lathi blow on his person.

Thereafter the complainant snatched the lathi of Lal Chand accused and he caused injuries to the aggressors. On hearing the noise Jai Pal and Rajbir also came to the spot and thereupon the accused are said to have run away. Kishan Pal was taken to B.K.Hospital by Rajbir in an unconcious state. He was referred to Safderjang Hospital in Delhi but instead he was taken to Jeewan Hospital Delhi where he died due to the injury suffered by him. The post mortem was conducted in B.K.Hospital in Faridabad where the body was brought back.

The FIR was registered and the police completed its investigative process and submitted a challan against all the four persons prima facie finding their complexity in the said offence. The trial Court before whom the matter was committed after the submission of challan charged all of them under the provisions of Sections 302-323-34 IPC.

All the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses to bring home the guilt of the appellant.

All the accused persons denied the allegations while recording their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Jagat Singh Satish and Lal
Chand took up common defence that it was a false case and Lal Chand was not present at the spot while Beni pleaded that a false case was registered and further stated that in fact buffaloes were purchased by Jagat Singh and Rajbir from Bhulli of Kaithal and Bhulli and Sultan had come to recover the price of buffaloes on 12-06-1993 in the evening. On 12-06-1993 Rajbir came to the dairy of Jagat Singh and Jagat Singh requested him to make payment of Bhulli upon which Rajbir abused Jagat Singh and then Satish gave a slap to Rajbir who went away after hurling abuses. Sat Pal was a constable in PS Sarai Khwaja and Raj Pal etc. were waiting for Satish near the ice-cream factory which was in the way which Satish used to follow.

Rajbir Kishan Pal and Sat Pal attacked Satish with lathis when he came
from the side of part of 'C' Block. He came running from the dairy and
injuries were caused to him also. Jagat Singh had reached the dairy. Two
injures were caused to him by the complainant party. He yielded lathi in
self defence and one injury each was caused to Kishan Pal and Rajpal. With the help of Sat Pal a false case was registered against them. It was stated that he had suffered a fracture. Satish and Jagat also suffered multiple njuries at the hands of the complainant party but no action was taken agaisnt the complainant party.

This plea of the defence was supported only the appellant while all the three accused replied in the negative. In support of his plea DW1-Bhulli DW2-Dr.V.K.Aggarwal were examined and thereafter the evidence was closed.

The trial Court came to the conclusion that the appellant was guilty of having committed an offence under section 304-II IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 7 years vide orders dated 19-08-1996 which the subject matter of the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the undisputed facts on record are that there was a quarrel between the complainant and the appellant and that only one lathi blow was given on the head of the deceased which proved to be fatal. He further contended with elaborate reference to the findings recorded by the trial Court that the appellant was not the aggressor and in fact the incident had taken place near the dairy of the appellant and a clear finding was returned by the trial Court that the complainant party was the aggressor. The only reason for awarding conviction to the appellant was that he exceeded his right of private defence. It was further pleaded by him that the trial Court had completely overlooked the fact that the appellant had suffered 5 injuries out of which one was a fracture of leg which turned out to be grievous. He had also suffered one head injury and Satish who also belonged to his faction and is related to him suffered 5 injuries. Jagat Singh has suffered one injury. The deceased suffered only one injury on the head which turned out to be fatal and the complainant suffered only one injury on the head. In this view of the matter learned counsel for the appellant contended that it cannot be said that the appellant had exceeded his right of self-defence . He was faced with an aggressive group of people. It was but natural for him to react. On the strength of this it was pleaded that the appellant was entitled to acquittal.
On the other hand learned counsel for the State contended that the conviction and sentence is perfectly in order as the deceased had suffered a fatal blow on the head which according to him was largely unprovoked.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

The trial Court while examining the evidence had clearly returned a finding that the place of occurrence is in close proximity to the dairy which is run by the appellant and further went on to hold that it was complainant and his brother-Kishan Pal who were the aggressors. It was also a conceded case that the appellant had suffered injuries at the hands of the complainant party which included a fracture. The testimony of PW9- Dr.A.K.Gupta reveals the following injuries on the person of the appellant
Satish and Jagat respectively :-

“1. Lacerated wound 2.5x0.5 cm muscle deep on right parietal region. Bleeding was present.
2. Reddish contusion 20 cm x 4.0 (20.00 cm x 4.0 cm) on left scapular region of back.
3. Reddish contusion 20.0x4.0cm on right scapular region of back.
4. Diffused swelling on lateral aspect of left ankel joint accompanied by a reddish contusion 5.0x2.0 cm on it.
5. Reddish contusion 1.0x2.0 cm on posterior aspect of left shoulder joint.
Crl Appeal 589-SB of 1996 -6-
x-ray examination was advised in respect of injuries Nos. 2 3 and 4. Said
injuries were kept under observation. All the injuries were said to be caused with a blunt weapon and wtihin proper duration of 24 hours.”

Injuries on the person of Satish Kumar

1- Reddish contusion 15.0 cm x 2.0 cm on posterior aspect of left fore-arm in its upper third part. Movements were restricted and painful. X-ray examination was advised.
2- Diffused swelling on the left fore-arm in its lower third part accompanied by reddish contuison 2.5x2.5 cm. X-ray examination was advised.
3- Reddish contusion 8.0x2.0 cm on medial aspect of right knee.
4- Reddish contusion 8.0x5.0 cm on lateral aspect of left knee.
5- Reddish abrasion 3.0 x 2.5 cm on front of right fore-arm. Injuries on the person of Jagat Singh
1- A reddish contusion 10.0 x 5.0 cm on palmer aspect of left hand. X-ray examination was advised.

It was stated to be caused by blunt weapon within duration of 24 hours.
Having regard to the aforesaid the learned trial Court was equired to test the plea of self -defence in the backdrop of the injuries which largely reflected the intent and threat of the aggressors. A person who is faced with a threat perception is entitled to react in order to save himself.

Whether the reaction and the consequent action taken by such a person is in excess of his right of self defence would be a matter of fact to be established and inferred from the evidence on record.

Concededly the appellant had suffered numerous injuries at the hands of his aggressors and had also suffered fracture. One lathi blow was attributed to him which proved to be fatal. In the melee which follows in a group violence where a person is subjected to extreme aggression the reaction which follows from the victim is spontaneous and is never measured. The intent at that time is to ward off the aggressor and to
preserve oneself which is a natural instinct inherent in every living being.

The intention is never to cause violence but violence to offer defence by
which is more of a defensive mechanism unleached as a reflex measure to preserve one's own existence. The consequent death of deceased Kishan Pal was more as a will of the Providence rather than willing and intending injury of the appellant.

In this view of the matter it cannot be said conclusively that the appellant had exceeded his right of self-defence. Rather it has been held to the contrary to say that he was very much within his right of defence and was not liable.

This appeal is accordingly accepted and the appellant is acquitted of the charge against him.

28-11-2007
[Mahesh Grover]
Judge

CIVIL WRIT PETITION 17531 OF 2007

DECIDED ON : 02-04-2008
K.S.Gill and another ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ....Respondents
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr.J.V.Yadav Advocate for the petitioners
Mr.Yatinder Sharma DAG Punjab

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA J (ORAL)
The petitioners joined the services of respondent No.3- College on 07-07-1969 and 09-08-1971 respectively and retired on 28-02- 2003 and 31-08-2004 as Lecturers. They have prayed that directions be issued to the respondents to release their retiral dues which also include leave encashment payment of arrears on acount of revision of pay-scales with effect from 01-01-1996 payment of dues of allowances such as DA HRA Medical Allowance at par with the employees of the Punjab Government and other retiral dues. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this case is squarely covered by the decision rendered in CWP 3583 of 2007 in K.C.Sharma versus State of Punjab and others on 17-12- 2007 wherein the same issues were involved and which relates to the same college.

We have perused the impugned judgement and are of the considered opinion that this case is squarely covered by the aforementioned judgement.

In view of the above we allow this writ petition in the same terms as that of K.C.Sharma's case (supra) In case the payments are not made to the petitioners in terms of the directions issued in K.C.Sharma's case then the respondents shall be liable to pay interest @ 6% per annum to the petitioner.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge
02-04-2008

CWP 16955 of 2007

Present:
Mr.M.S.Sidhu Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.Jatyender Sharma DAG Punjab
Mr.P.K.Khurana Advocate for the respondent- University

Reply on behalf of respondent has been filed in Court today.
The same is taken on record.

A perusal of the reply shows that the petitioner has the alternative remedy of challenging the decision of the committee by filing an appeal under Rule 20 of Part II Chapter 10 of Volume III Calender of Guru Nanak Dev University Amritsar before the Vice Chancellor.

As the aforementioned remedy is available to the petitioner therefore he may challenge in the order impugned in this case before the Vice Chancellor. The delay in filing the appeal shall be condoned in case the appeal is filed within one month from today.

Disposed of.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge
02-04-2008

IN THE PUNJAB and HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CIVIL WRIT PETITION 16491 OF 2007 DATE OF DECISION : 02-04-2008

Sikander Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ....Respondents

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr.B.S.Mittal Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.Yatinder Sharma DAG Punjab
Mr.R.S.Rai Senior Advocate with Ms.Meenakshi Dogra Advocate for respondent No.5

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA J (ORAL)
The petitioner has prayed that directions be issued to the respondents to release the pension gratuity leave encashment and other remaining retiral benefits. The petitioner retired from service of Municipal Council Maur Tehsil Talwandi Sabo district Bathinda on 30-06-2007. As he has not been paid his retiral dues hence he has filed this writ petition.

Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs.2 50 000 and the remaining amount would be paid to him in due course of time as the Municipal Council is going through financial crunch.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.5 to pay the entire retrial dues of the petitioner to him within a period of 4 months from today. In the meantime we direct the State of Punjab to release grants to Municipal
Council Maur expeditiously so that Municipal Council could discharge its
liability towards its retired employees.

[Ashutosh Mohunta]
Judge

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia]
Judge

RANJIT SINGH BAJWA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR CWP 12864 of 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : March 28, 2008

Ranjit Singh Bajwa .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .... Respondent

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

Present :
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate, Addl. A.G., Punjab with
Mr. Jitender Kumar, Advocate.
Ms. Sukhwinder Kaur Saroya, Advocate for respondent No.2.

S.S. SARON, J.
The petitioner by way of the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the impugned notification dated 03.08.2007 (Annexure P-6) whereby he has been removed from the post of Vice-Chairman, Punjab School Education Board (“Board” - for short) (respondent No.2) and for quashing the order dated 03.08.2007 (Annexure P-7) whereby he has been relived from the services of the Board. A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to re-instate the petitioner as Vice-Chairman of the Board.

The petitioner states that he was working as Senior Professor and Dean Languages at Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. He is an eminent scholar and has earned niche for himself being a hardworking educationist.

Besides, his career is blotless throughout. The State Government appointed him Vice-Chairman of the Board till 30.05.2009 vide notification dated
29.12.2006 (Annexure P-1). In continuation of the appointment notification,
the terms and conditions of service of the petitioner were circulated vide
Annexure P2. The petitioner joined as Vice-Chairman of the Board vide
joining report dated 2.1.2007 (Annexure P-3). All of a sudden, a show cause notice was issued to him vide memo dated 31.05.2007 (Annexure P-4). It was inter alia alleged therein that the Election Code of Conduct for conducting elections had been implemented or in other words had come into effect on 29.12.2006, that is, the same date when the petitioner was appointed as Vice- Chairman of the Board. However, the petitioner it is alleged submitted his joining report on 02.1.2007 as Vice-Chairman of the Board. This was in clear violation of the Election Code of Conduct. It was alleged that in terms of the Election Code of Conduct, if an order of appointment or transfer had not been implemented then the same can be implemented only after taking fresh approval from the newly formed Government and after completion of the election process. Therefore, the petitioner it is alleged had violated the Election Code of Conduct. Accordingly, he was asked to file his reply within 15 days so as to clarify his position to the Government. The petitioner submitted his reply (Annexure P-5) to the show cause notice. It is submitted that the petitioner was serving as Professor and Dean, School of Punjabi Studies, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. He informed the Vice- Chancellor, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar that he has been appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Board. A request was made on 29.12.2006 on telephone for relieving him from the post occupied by him. However, on advice, the petitioner contacted the Registrar of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. The petitioner accordingly asked the Registrar to relieve him on 30.12.2006, however, the same was a Saturday and a holiday. The next day i.e. 31.12.2006 was a Sunday and 01.01.2007 being New Year's day was again
a holiday. The Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar relieved the petitioner
on 2.1.2007 (Forenoon) and he joined the Board as Vice-Chairman on
02.1.2007 (Afternoon). The State Government has vide impugned notification dated 03.08.2007 (Annexure P-6) removed the petitioner from the post of Vice-Chairman of the Board and on the same day i.e. 03.08.2007 relieved him from the services of the Board. The said orders removing the petitioner from the services of the Board and relieving him, as already noticed, are assailed in this petition.

Notice of motion was issued to the respondents who have filed their separate replies. It is stated by respondent No.1 that the terms and conditions of service (Annexure P-2) were never circulated by the State
Government (respondent No.1). The issuing of show cause notice and passing of the impugned orders are admitted. It is submitted that the petitioner had motivated his appointment/joining during the period when the Election Code of Conduct was in force. As such, no appointment could be made. His joining on the post of Vice-Chairman of the Board was in violation of the Election Code of Conduct. It is submitted that the action of the petitioner is a grave mis-conduct on his part which attracts the provisions of Section 10(A) of the Punjab School Education Board Act, 1969 (“Act” - for short). Besides, in order to comply with the principles of natural justice, a show cause notice was issued.

In the reply filed by the Secretary, Punjab School Education Board (respondent No.2), it is submitted that Dr. Suresh Kumar Tandon has been
apointed as Vice-Chairman of the Board vide Notification dated 03.12.2007
(Annexure R1). Besides, he has submitted his joining report on 18.12.2007
and is working as Chairman of the Board. The petitioner has not impleaded
Dr. Suresh Kumar Tandon and, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be
dismissed. It is also stated that the petitioner had motivated his appointment
and joined during the period the Election Code of Conduct was in force.

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the appointment of the petitioner as Vice-Chairman of the Board was in accordance with law and the procedure. The coming into effect of the Election Code of Conduct, it is submitted is of no consequence and is for the purposes of conducting the elections. The Code does not make the
appointment of the petitioner to be illegal. It is submitted that the petitioner
could only be removed from service of the Board in accordance with the provisions of Section 10(A) of the Act. None of the conditions as envisaged
by Section 10(A) are applicable in the case of the petitioner and, therefore, his removal from the service of the Board is vitiated.

Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate, Addl. A.G. Punjab appearing with Mr. Jitender Kumar, Advocate has made a reference to the Election Code of Conduct dated 07.01.2007 and submitted that in terms thereof, no appointment or promotions in Government/Public Undertakings were liable to be made during the period of the elections without prior clearance from the Election Commission. It is submitted that the appointment of the petitioner having been made during the operation of the Model Code of Conduct for conducting the elections was/is clearly illegal. Reliance is placed on the case of Harbans Singh Jalal v. Union of India, 1997 (2) PLR 778 (DB) (P and H)and also in the matter of Special Reference No.1 of 2002 (Gujarat Assembly E lection Matter), (2002) 8 SCC 237.

Ms. Sukhwinder Kaur Saroya, Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 has submitted that the new incumbment namely Dr. Suresh Kumar Tandon having been appointed on 3.12.2007 and having joined the Board on 18.12.2007, the present petition without impleadment of Dr. Suresh Kumar
Tandon is not maintainable.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. The petitioner
who was appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Board on 29.12.2006 till
30.5.2009 has assailed his removal from the Board vide impugned notification dated 03.08.2007 (Annexure P-6). It is recorded in the said notification that the petitioner had exhibited serious misconduct by joining as Vice-Chairman of the Board on 2.01.2007 in contravention of the Code of Conduct of the Election Commission which had come into effect on 29.12.2006. Accordingly,the Government in exercise of power conferred under Section 10 (A) of the Act as amended was pleased to remove him from the post of Vice-Chairman ofthe Board with immediate effect.

In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, the provisions of Section 10 (A) of the Act may be adverted to, which read as under :-

“Removal of a *** 10(A) The State Government may, by member including notification in the Offical Gazette, Chairman and remove any member including Vice Chairman Chairman and Vice-Chairman, but
other than an official member if,-

(a) he has become subject to any of the disqualifications specified in
sub-section (1) of section 8;

(b) he willfully refuses to carry out the provisions of this Act;

(c) he abuses the powers vested in him or is guilty of misconduct;

(d) he remains absent without leave of the Board for more than three
consecutive meetings of the Board without sufficient cause; or

(e) it appears to the State Government that his continuation in the office
is detrimental to the public interest.

The removal of the petitioner from the office of Vice-Chairman of the Board is on account of his having violated the provisions of the Election Code of Conduct for conducting the elections. In the Election Code of Conduct dated 07.01.2007 which is being relied upon by the learned counsel for the State, it has been provided as follows:-

“On Transfer and posting of officials:

The Commission directs that there shall be a total ban on the transfer of all officers/officials connected with the conduct of the election. These include but are not restricted to:-

(i) to (Viii)
X X X X X X X X X X X

(ix) No appointments or promotions in Government/Public Undertakings shall be made during this period, without prior clearance of the Commission.

A perusal of the above Clause (ix), which is relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel for the State shows that no appointment or promotion in Government/Public Undertakings are to be made during the period of the
election without prior clearance of the Election Commission. It may be
noticed that during the course of hearing, it has been submitted by learned
Senior counsel for the respondent-State that the action of the petitioner by
motivating his appointment and joining, is in contravention of Clause 10 (A)
(e) of the Act. Clause (e) provides for removal of Chairman or Vice- Chairman if it appears to the State Government that the continuation in the office is detrimental to 'public interest'. The petitioner admittedly was appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Board on 29.12.2006. On the same date, the Election Code of Conduct had come into force. Nothing has, however, been shown or placed on record to show that the petitioner had motivated his appointment. It may appropriately be noticed that in the show cause notice dated 31.5.2007 it has not been alleged that the petitioner had motivated his appointment as Vice- Chairman of the Board, which is now the stand taken by the State Government in its written statement. Besides, it has been alleged by the State that the petitioner had presented his joining report on 2.1.2007 which was in violation of the Code of Conduct of Elections. However, Clause (ix) of the Election Code of Conduct, as referred to above, only provides for preventing of appointments or promotions in Government/Public Undertakings being made during the period of the operation of the Election Code of Conduct without prior clearance of the Election Commission. Therefore, the fact that the petitioner joined his duties during the operation of the Election Code of Conduct for conducting elections is not shown to be in violation of Clause (ix) or any other rules or instructions. The appointments having been made on the
same date, it cannot ex facie be said that the appointment of the petitioner as Vice Chairman of the Board was in violation of the Election Code of Conduct and thereby he had rendered himself liable for misconduct. The statutory rules clearly provide the grounds for removal of the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Board. It is nowhere stated in the show cause notice or even in the impugned order/notification of removal of the petitioner that his continuation in office is detrimental to 'public interest' as is now contended. The fact of any public interest being involved is not mentioned. The provisions of Section 10

(A) of the Act provides specific grounds for removal. Therefore, the
incumbent on the post of Chairman or Vice-Chairman could be removed only in accordance with the said provisions. Besides, where statutory duties are imposed on the respondents and there is a failure on their part to discharge the statutory obligation, a writ of mandamus is liable to be issued. The petitioner has been removed from the service of the Board in violation of the conditions provided in Section 10 (A) of the Act. The violation of the Election Code of Conduct of the Election Commission is not shown to be covered by Clauses (a) to (e) of Section 10 (A) of the Act. The appointment of the petitioner as Vice- Chairman of the Board was made by the State Government. The fact that it was made on the same day that the Election Code of Conduct had come into effect cannot be said to be such an act on the part of the petitioner whereby he motivated his appointment/joining as is the stand now taken in the written statement.

Learned counsel for the State has placed reliance on the case of Harbans Singh Jalal (Supra). It has inter alia been observed therein that Election Commission can issue directions to the Government and political parties and enforce the Model Code of Conduct from the date of notification itself till the termination of election process. It was observed that even if there is no provision of Code of Conduct in the Representation of People's Act, 1951 or the Constitution of India, it does not violate any statutory provision.
In fact it is an accepted convention by all the political parties for the conduct
of fair and pure elections. The restrictions imposed on the Government from
announcing any welfare policies which may influence the voters, it was
observed, are in the interest of fairness and purity of election. There is no
dispute to the proposition enunciated therein. However, the said observations are inapplicable to the facts of the present case where the removal of the petitioner is in violation of Section 10(A) of the Act. As regards the Gujarat Assembly Election Matter (supra) the learned Senior Counsel has referred to the observations made in Para 126. The said observations consider the constitutional scheme with regard to the holding of elections to the Parliament and the State Legislature. It is observed that the superintendence, direction and control of the conduct of elections referred to in Article 324 (1) of the Constitution are entrusted to the Election Commission. It is not in dispute that the Election Commission has been entrusted with the power of superintendence, direction and control for the conduct of elections. However, in the absence of any material, it cannot be said that the order appointing the petitioner on the same date that the Election Code of Conduct came into force, was with the knowledge of the coming into force of the Code of Conduct for conducting elections.

The contention of Ms. Sukhwinder Kaur Saroya, Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 that the writ petition is not maintainable without impleading Dr. Suresh Kumar Tandon who was subsequently appointed and had submitted his joining report may be considered. In the present case, the writ petition was filed by the petitioner in this Court on 18.8.2007. It was taken up on 20.8.2007 on which date notice of motion was issued to respondent No.1 for 27.08.2007. The Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepted notice and sought time to seek instructions. Thereafter, on the request of the State Counsel it was adjourned on 27.08.2007 to 07.09.2007.

It was again adjourned on the request of the counsel for the petitioner and then on a joint request, it was adjourned to 03.10.2007. On 03.10.2007, on the request of the State counsel, the case was adjourned to 06.11.2007. It was ordered that in the meanwhile, the petitioner would not be evicted from his accommodation. Thereafter, while the petition was pending, the State
Government vide Notification dated 3.12.2007 (Annexure R1) appointed Dr.
Suresh Kumar Tandon as Vice Chairman of the Board and he submitted his
joining report on 18.12.2007. The appointment of Dr. Suresh Kumar Tandon
as Vice-Chairman of the Board has admittedly been made during the pendency of the lis. Therefore, whatever action has been taken during the pendency of the proceedings is subject to the final outcome of the decision and the writ petition cannot be said to have been rendered infructuous on account of the fresh appointment of another incumbent. In Nagesh Datta Shetti and others v . State of Karnataka and others, 2005 (10) SCC 383 , the challenge in the writ appeal was against the directions given by the Single Judge of the High Court to grant occupancy rights to the respondents in the said case. The issue in appeal against directions of the Single Judge was whether the direction given by the Single Bench could be maintained when the matter was being remitted by the Single Bench to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication. The writ appeal had been admitted to examine the legality of the direction. However, no stay was granted. The Tribunal did not keep the proceedings pending, though it was brought to its notice that the writ appeal had been admitted. The Tribunal acted on the basis of the directions given by the learned Single Judge of the High Court and granted occupancy rights. The High Court held that the writ appeal had been rendered infructuous because of the subsequent decision of the Tribunal. It was observed by the Supreme Court that correctness of the
order passed by the Single Judge was being challenged in the writ appeal and any decision taken by the Tribunal has per force be subject to the decision in the writ appeal. The Division Bench, it was observed, was liable to consider the matter on merits without concluding that the writ appeal had become infructuous. In Parvinder Singh Bajaj v. State of Punjab, 1995 (2) All Instant Judgments 29 a Division Bench of this Court considered the case of removal of the President, of the Municipal Committee from its membership and presidentship on the allegations of misuse of powers and squandering of money. An inquiry was held. However, the complaint and the inquiry report were not conveyed to the petitioner. The same was held to be in violation of the principles of natural justice and the order removing the petitioner therein from membership and presidentship was quashed. It was observed that persons occupying elected offices cannot be removed
unceremoniously. During the pendency of the writ petition in the said case,
fresh elections were held. The same had in fact resulted due to the impugned order being passed. It was held that the principles of lis pendens would apply and with the quashing of the impugned order, the elections that were held cannot survive. As a necessary consequence, the status quo as it obtained prior to the termination of the President of the Municipal Committee was restored.

In the circumstances, this Court is not to dismiss the writ petition merely on the ground that another person has been appointed as Vice Chairman of the Board during the pendency of the writ petition and neither is it liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.

The appointment of Dr. Suresh Kumar Tandon as Vice-Chairman of the Board was during the pendency of the writ petition and the action taken during its pendency, is subject to the ultimate decisions of this Court.

The appointment of the petitioner having been held to be in violation of Section 10(A) of the Act, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notification dated 3.08.2007 (Annexure P-6) removing the petitioner from service of the Board and the order dated 03.08.2007 (Annexure P-7) relieving the petitioner are quashed. No costs.

(S.S. SARON)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE

RANBIR SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB Criminal Misc M 6090 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Order: 24.03.2008

Ranbir Singh Saini @ Ranvir Saini @ Ranvir Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab. ..Respondent

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

Present:
Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. A.S.Brar, D.A.G.,Punjab.

RAJESH BINDAL J.
Prayer in the present petition is for grant of interim bail to the petitioner, pending trial. The ground for the same is that the petitioner has to appear in his B.A. Part-I(Bureau) Examination commencing from 27.03.2008.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner was granted interim bail for appearance in 10+2 examination, at the time of death of his father and at the time of marriage of his sister. At none of the occasions, he ever misused the concession of bail granted by this Court and surrendered before the Jail authorities within time. In support of his claim, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the Roll Number Slip and Date-Sheet issued by Guru Nanak Dev University.

As per the Date-Sheet placed on record, the examinations are to commence on 27.03.2008 and to conclude on 29.04.2008. Keeping in view the past conduct of the petitioner, which is not disputed even by the learned counsel appearing for the State and the fact that the interim bail is being sought for the purpose of taking the
examination, it is directed that the petitioner shall be granted interim bail from 26.03.2008 with the condition that he will surrender before the Superintendent, Central Jail, Gurdaspur on 30.04.2008 at 11.00 A.M. This shall be subject to his furnishing heavy security to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(RAJESH BINDAL)
JUDGE

HARBHAJAN SINGH Versus G N D UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and ORS Civil Writ Petition 19902 of 2001



Sh Ashish Kapur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Ashish Kapur,
Research Fellow,
Deptt. of Pharmaceutical Sciences,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. _____________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Senior Superintendent of Police,
Amritsar. _____________ Respondent

CC No. 798 of 2007

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Manminder Singh, S.P(D), on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.

In compliance with the orders of the Court dated 16-8-2007, the respondent states that full and complete information has been supplied to the complainant.

The complainant is not present. Apparently, he is satisfied with the information which has been provided to him.

Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 19th October, 2007

PUNEET SHARMA AND ORS Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS CWP12132 of 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 28.9.2007

Puneet Sharma and others -----Petitioners
Vs.
State of Punjab and others -----Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

Present:
Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.DAG,Haryana.
Mr. DS Patwalia, Advocate.
Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.5.

JUDGMENT
This petition seeks quashing of corrigendum dated
24.7.2007, Annexure P.2 issued by respondent No.1, State of Punjab and order dated 1.8.2007, Annexure P.3 issued by the Guru Nanak Dev University, to the effect that no admission to NRI
sponsored seat shall be made.

On 13.8.2007, following order was passed:-

The eligibility of the petitioners in NRI category has been cancelled. Admittedly, the petitioners are not NRIs nor the children or wards of the NRI. Merely being first degree relation is not enough for eligibility in NRI category in view of the law laid down in P.A.Inamdar Vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2005 SC 3226. The petitioners are thus not entitled to any relief.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners says that respondent Nos. 5 to 7 have also been illegally admitted in the NRI category and the said admissions ought to be cancelled.

Issue notice of motion confined to this relief for 14.9.2007.

It has also been pointed out that if admission of illegally admitted candidates was cancelled, the petitioners might have a chance of getting admitted in general category on their merit.

This aspect will also be considered.

Inspite of time taken and opportunity granted, the
University has not filed any reply. However, it has been orally explained that some candidates have been given admissions who were lower in rank to the petitioner before receipt of intimation about amendment in the policy of the State Government and on August 1, 2007, decision was taken not to give any further admissions for NRI sponsored seats.

Stand of respondent No.5, one of the candidates, who has been given admission is that he took the admission in NRI sponsored quota in good faith.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.

In order dated 24.7.2007 in CWP No.10097 of 2007
(Sohrab Arora v. State of Punjab and others), the issue whether NRI sponsored candidates could be given admission, was considered in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.A.Inamdar (supra). On notice being issued to the State of Punjab, affidavit dated 13.7.2007 was filed.

The State itself took the stand that reservation for NRI sponsored candidates was not permissible in law. Deletion of the said category was challenged in CWP No.10968 of 2007 (Dr. Gurtaj Singh v. state of Punjab and another), CWP No.10961 of 2007 (Ismat Vijay Singh v. State of Punjab and others) and CWP No.10486 of 2007 (Dr. Shikha Aggarwal v. State of Punjab and others), decided on 24.7.2007 and the same was upheld.

Accordingly, admissions given after 13.7.2007 when the State Government itself deleted reservation in NRI sponsored quota being violative of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in PA Inamdar (supra), we have to hold the admissions given by respondent No.2 under NRI category to those who are not NRIs as per judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.A.Inamdar (supra) to be illegal. If the private respondents who have been given admissions, are allowed to continue, even though, in merit they are lower to the petitioners, this will be violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, the admissions being
unconstitutional, void and against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as policy of the State Government duly notified.

Accordingly, we allow this petition and direct respondent No.2 to pass further consequential orders in accordance with law.

( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )
JUDGE

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE

Dr Jaspal Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No.84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh.

Dr. Jaspal Singh,
# 13, Rana Mill,
Opp. Sandhu Avenue,
Chheharta, Amritsar. ---------------------------------Appellant.

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. ------------------------------- Respondent.

AC No.188 of 2007
Order

Present:
Dr. Jaspal Singh Appellant in person.
Shri Lakhbir Singh, Assistant Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and Shri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, on behalf of PIO, Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

On 13.08.2007, the last date of hearing, we had observed that certain items of information supplied by the Respondent to the Appellant were deficient. We had directed that the deficiencies be removed. The details in respect of educational and other qualifications of Deputy Registrars serving in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, were to be supplied to the Appellant.

2. The Appellant states before us today that the information demanded by him in respect of Deputy Registrars has been duly delivered to him and his request for information has been met.

3. In these circumstances, the matter is disposed of and closed.



Rajan Kashyap
Chief Information Commissioner,
Jalandhar
17.09.2007

Lt. Gen. P.K.Grover (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Dr Jaspal Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No.84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh.

Dr. Jaspal Singh,
# 13, Rana Mill,
Opp. Sandhu Avenue,
Chheharta,
Amritsar. ---------------------------------Complainant.
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. ------------------------------- Respondent.

CC No.1014 of 2007
Order


Present:
Dr. Jaspal Singh Complainant in person.
Shri Lakhbir Singh, Assistant Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and Shri Harbhajan Singh, Legal Adviser, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, on behalf of PIO, Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

On 13.08.2007, the last date of hearing, we had observed that Complainant had demanded the information in respect of 140 colleges affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, whereas the information had been supplied in respect of 76 colleges only. The Respondent had been directed to supply the information in respect of the remaining 64 colleges also. The Complainant states before us today that the information regarding the remaining 64 colleges has also been delivered to him.

2. In these circumstances, the information having been delivered, the matter is disposed of and closed.


Rajan Kashyap
Chief Information Commissioner,
Jalandhar
17.09.2007

Lt. Gen. P.K.Grover (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Sh Palvinder Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Palvinder Singh,
17, Hargobind Avenue, Sher Shah Suri Road,
Back side Bhalla Colony,
Chheharta, Amritsar. __________ Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer ,
O/o Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. _________ Respondent

AC No. 270 of 2007

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) Sh. Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar, and S. Harbhajan Singh, Advocate,on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard.

The complainant in this case has asked for photostat copies of the entire file including the notings and correspondence pertaining to the counting of his ad hoc service towards pensionery benefits. Under the impression that the office notings are exempt from the provisions of the RTI Act, this information has been denied by the respondent vide their letter dated 28-6-2007. It has been made clear to the respondent that there is no such exemption and the office notings, unless covered in the exemption categories mentioned u/s 8 of the RTI Act, are not exempted and have to be provided to any person asking for the information. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to give the required information to the complainant after he has deposited the prescribed fees @ Rs. 2/- per page and for this purpose, the exact amount required to be deposited may be intimated to the complainant by post.

Adjourned to 10,AM on 5-10-2007 for confirmation of compliance.



(Kulbir Singh) (P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner, State Information Commissioner
Dated: 14th September, 2007

Sh Ashish Kapur versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Ashish Kapur,
Research Fellow,
Deptt. of Pharmaceutical Sciences,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. _________________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Senior Superintendent of Police,
Amritsar. ________________ Respondent

CC No. 798 of 2007

Present:
i) Sh.Ashish Kapoor, complainant. In person
ii) S. Manminder Singh, S.P.,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.

The respondent has brought with him a copy of the Inquiry Report of the complaint made by Dr. Nidhi Kapoor Chawla. The respondent states that the Inquiry Report was not sent to the complainant earlier because he has sent a crossed IPO of Rs. 10/-,which cannot be encashed on account of being ‘crossed’. At this stage, in view of the long delay which has already been caused, I consider it necessary to waive the amount of application fees in this case and direct the respondent to give a copy of the Inquiry Report to the complainant in the Court.

The complainant may go through the report and in case any point mentioned in his application for information is not covered by this document, he may point it out on the next date of hearing.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 16-8-2007 for confirmation of compliance.



(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner

Dated 26th July , 2007

HARNEET KAUR Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIV AND ORS CWP 15162 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 25.7.2007

Harneet Kaur ...Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University and others ....Respondents

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta.

Present:
Shri Vipin Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri D.S. Patwalia, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

HEMANT GUPTA, J.
In the present writ petition, the petitioner has sought admission in the Department of Commerce and Business Management against NRI quota for Master of Business Administration Degree Course.

Admittedly, the petitioner is undergoing the similar course at Guru Nanak Dev University, Regional Centre, Gurdaspur and by now also completed one academic year.

The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that the admissions against the NRI quota have been made illegally and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for admission to MBA decree course conducted by the University at Amritsar.

Since the petitioner is already undergoing a similar course, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present writ petition with permission to file a civil suit seeking damages for wrongful deprivation of admission to the course conducted by the Guru Nanak Dev University at Amritsar.

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to seek damages for wrongful deprivation of admission, by filing a civil suit before the Court of competent jurisdiction. As and when such suit is filed, the same shall be decided on merits, in accordance with law.

(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE

GAURAV DHAWAN Versus G N D UNI AMRITSAR AND ORS CWP 9177 of 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 10.7.2007

Gaurav Dhawan. -----Petitioner
Vs.
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others. -----Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

Present:
Mr. Pankaj Maini, Advocate for the petitioner.

ORDER:
This petition seeks a direction to allow the petitioner to participate in the viva and award degree of B-Tech. (Computer Science and Engineering).

Case of the petitioner is that on 24.6.2003, the petitioner got admission in B.Tech, Computer Science in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. He cleared 1st semester of B.Tech but due to his mental status, he could not clear the paper of Mathematics-I. Thereafter, he cleared 2nd Semester, while he was undergoing regular treatment for his illness. He could not clear 3rd Semester, but was promoted to 4th Semester without being asked to complete 1st and 3rd Semesters.

Result of his 4th Semester was not declared, but he was promoted to 5th
Semester and then to 6th Semester. Result of 7th Semester in which the
petitioner appeared has also not been declared though he has been
allowed to proceed on the training period of 15 months with the HCL
Technologies Ltd. where he was placed as a Trainee with SPEG-2 of
ERS-LOB at Noida. The petitioner successfully completed the training.

He also completed the industrial training required for 8th Semester, but
he was not allowed to attend viva. Father of the petitioner made a representation.

It has been further averred that as per calendar of the University, if a candidate does not pass all the courses of 1st Semester and 2nd Semester, he cannot be promoted to 3rd Semester. He is given a chance to reappear, but if he fails, he is not allowed to continue BTech.

programme. Inspite of the said provision, the petitioner was allowed to join the next higher Semester and made to pay fee and after allowing the petitioner to continue upto this stage, he was not even allowed to participate in viva. In view of fact that even according to learned counsel for the petitioner and as per averments made in para 20 of the petition, the petitioner could not continue in the course, mere fact that he was allowed to illegally continue upto this stage, cannot be a ground to issue a direction to perpetuate illegality.

The writ petition is dismissed.

( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )
JUDGE

( AJAI LAMBA )
JUDGE

MANDEEP KAKKAR Versus G N D U AND ANR CIVIL WRIT PETITION 7922 OF 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

DATE OF DECISION: May 23, 2007

Parties Name Mandeep Kakkar ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University and another ...RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NIRMAL YADAV

PRESENT:
Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral)
Order.
In this writ petition, it is prayer of the petitioner that direction be issued to the respondents to issue him roll number so that he can sit in the annual examinations in Diploma Course of Management and Business Accounts, which are going on. During arguments, it has been brought to our notice that there are only six subjects. Examination in four subjects is already over and for the 5th subject is scheduled for tomorrow, i.e., May 24, 2007. It is also apparent from the records that the petitioner has failed to attend 75% of the lectures, which are mandatory to sit in the examinations.

No case is made out for interference. Dismissed.

( Jasbir Singh )
Judge

( Nirmal Yadav)
Judge

Sh Sarbjit Singh Verka versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

State Information Commission, Punjab,
SCO No.32-34,(1st Floor), Sector 17 C , Chandigarh.
Sh. Sarbjit Singh Verka,
Principal Investigator,
PHRO,
22, Sector 2-A,
Chandigarh. …………Appellant
Vs

The Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. ………….Respondent

AC No. 157 of 2006

Present:
i) Sh. Mohinder Kumar, Advocate, o/o Sh. R.S.Bains,Advocate,
on behalf of the appellant.
ii) S. Harbhajan Singh, Advocate, and S. Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.

In compliance with the orders of this Court dated 22-3-2007, the respondent has shown to us the three letters issued by the University to three paper setters informing them that they have been debarred from the University work in view of the reasons stated therein. Question No. 1 of the appellant’s application for information dated 10-10-2006, therefore stands disposed of . The reasons why the names of the paper setters who have been debarred, cannot be disclosed to the appellant, have already been mentioned in the orders of this Court dated 22-3-2007.

As regards question No.2 of the appellant’s application for information, the appellant has submitted a detailed sequence of events along with all the concerned documents, including the orders of the Hon’ble High Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, which make it clear that strictures have been passed by the Hon’ble High Court against the experts and the paper setters and directions have been given to take action against them, on the basis of the affidavit submitted by the Registrar, GNDU, Amritsar, stating that the experts were fully satisfied with the correctness of the model Answer Key provided by the paper setters. On the other hand, the appellant has submitted copies of the communications sent by the experts to the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar dated 4-8-2005 and 9-8-2005 stating that it was not correct if an affidavit has been filed before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court stating that they were satisfied with the answer keys, and that they have categorically pointed out the ambiguities in many of the disputed questions.

It is, therefore, pertinent for the appellant to ask whether a wrong affidavit hadbeen filed by the University before the Hon’ble High Court, if not, what action has been taken by the University against the experts concerned as directed by the Hon’ble Courts and, if yes, the action taken by the University against the person or persons responsible for filing the affidavit before the Court. The respondent seeks an adjournment for the examination of the documents submitted by the appellant to the Court today. A copy of the application given by the appellant has been provided to the respondent, who should now give the required information to the appellant within 15 days.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 14-6-2007 for confirmation of compliance.

(Kulbir Singh) (P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner, State Information Commissioner

Dated: 26th April, 2007.

SHIVANI Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY ANDORS CIVIL WRIT PETITION 257 OF 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.


DATE OF DECISION: February 27, 2007

Parties Name Shivani ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University and others ...RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA

PRESENT:
Mr. R.S.Manhas, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Pal, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2.
Mr. R.S. Pathania, Advocate, for respondent No. 3.

JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) Order.
CM No. 3183-84 of 2007 CM applications are allowed and written-statement on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 along with annexures attached thereto is taken on record.

CWP No. 257 of 2007:
Counsel for the respondent -University has shown us answer
sheet of the petitioner. We are satisfied that it belongs to her. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner states that he be allowed to withdraw this writ petition. We permit him to do so. Registry is directed to return to the petitioner Rs. 10,000/-, which are lying deposited with it, on an application moved in that regard. Answer sheet has been returned to counsel for the respondent -University.

( Jasbir Singh )
Judge

(Vinod K. Sharma)
Judge

SHIVALAK PRIMARY SCHOOL SOCIETY Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AMRITSAR and ORS CWP 19627 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.


Date of Decision: February 13, 2007

Shivalak Primary School Society .......Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and others .......Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J. S. KHEHAR
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. D. ANAND

Present:
Mr.Ajay Tewari, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.DS Patwalia, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr.Ashok Aggarwal, Additional AG Punjab. for respondent No.2,
Mr.Anupam Gupta, Advocate, for respondent no.4.

S. D. ANAND, J.
1. The National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993, amended by the National Council for Teachers Education (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as NCTE) governs the issue of grant of recognition to the Institutions offering or intending to offer a course or training in Teachers Education. For ensuring planned and coordinated
development of teachers education and for the determination and
maintenance of standards for teachers education, the Regional Committee of the NCTE satisfies itself that the Institution applying for the grant of recognition has adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and that it fulfils such other conditions required for proper functioning of the Institution for a course or training in teachers education, as may be determined by regulations. If the Committee is satisfied that the applicant-institution has fulfilled the norms, the recognition would be accorded. In case there is a default, the order would be otherwise.

2. The petitioner in the matter before us applied for the grant of
affiliation (for B.Ed. Course) for the period 2005-2006. Before granting provisional affiliation to the petitioner for the year 2005-2006, an inspection team deputed by the Competent Authority visited the premises on 29.6.2006 and noticed certain infrastructural deficiencies including the want of appropriate Faculty and Principal. Nonetheless, the provisional affiliation was granted to the petitioner for the session 2005-2006 and it (petitioner) was directed to make up the deficiencies at the earliest (Annexure P6). A reminder, in the context, was issued to the petitioner on 20.7.2006 (Annexure P7). In response thereto, the petitioner informed on 31.7.2006 (Annexure P8) that it had fulfilled all the conditions laid down by the Inspection Team of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and NCTE at the time of approval. It was further indicated in Annexure P8 that the details were enclosed therewith.

3. For the Academic session 2006-2007, the first and second
counselling for admission to the B.Ed. Course in the entire State of Punjab was held from 10.8.2006 to 31.8.2006 and 10.9.2006 to 18.9.2006 respectively. No counselling, however, was held for admission to the petitioner College. As the petitioner had not, by then, received any response on point of grant of affiliation, it approached this Court by filing Civil Writ Petition No.15503 of 2006. In that matter, a Committee was appointed by this Court (while disposing it of) to go into the aspect whether the requisite
requirement had been met by the petitioner before the cut off date or not.

The Committee (consisting of an Additional Secretary, Higher Education, Department of Punjab and the Registrar of respondent No.1) examined the records of the University as well as the concerned Colleges (in terms of the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid matter) in the presence of the representatives of Managements of all the concerned Colleges who were also heard personally and opportunity was given to them to submit their claims as per the directions of the Hon'ble High Court. The Committee recorded the following finding viz-a-viz the petitioner:

This College was given provisional affiliation for the session 2005-06. But no regular lecturer was appointed for the entire session. The College was well aware that it is obligatory on them to recruit proper teaching staff before the admissions of 2006-07.

After examining the record of this College, it was observed that the college was having four NET qualified lecturers before the cut off date i.e. 20.9.2006. The college did not provide any information regarding the recruitment of 3 adhoc lecturer upto 20.9.2006 and the University could not verify whether the college had requisite teaching staff as stipulated in the Govt. Memo dated 11.9.2006. Thus the college could not be given permission to admit the students for the current session having failed to meet the requirements of staff as explained. On the basis of the above facts, the committee finds the action taken by the University to be as per rules. (underlining for emphasis).

4. The plea raised by the petitioner is that the Committee findings
proceed on a factually incorrect premise inasmuch as it (Committee) did not at all notice that the fulfilment of the infrastructural requirement in toto had been communicated to the concerned quarters, vide Annexure P8, dated 31.7.2006 and the correctness of that averment has not been denied till date.

Yet another plea advocated on behalf of the petitioner is that the
respondents are estopped from denying affiliation inasmuch as it was on their asking that the continuation fee of Rs.10,000/- had been deposited by it. Reliance, in the context, was placed upon Annexure P12. It was otherwise conceded on behalf of the petitioner that no admissions for the current session had been made by it for want of affiliation.

5. On appreciation of the arguments aforementioned, in the light
of the material available on the file, we find that the petitioner is not on a firmer footing. It is beyond the pale of controversy that the inspection team did point out the want of certain infrastructural facilities (including the want of a Principal and Faculty) vide an inspection carried out on 29.6.2006 (Annexure P6). A reminder, in the context, was issued to all the similar applicant-Institutions including the petitioner on 20.7.2006 (Annexure P7).

Though the petitioner avers to have indicated the fulfilment of requirement vide letter dated 31.7.2006 (Annexure P8), the details averred to have been enclosed along with that letter have not seen the light of the day till date.

There cannot be any manner of dispute that Annexure P8 does indeed contain an averment that the details indicating the fulfilment of relevant conditions were enclosed therewith.

However, Annexure P8 does not contain any enclosure containing those details. Inspite of the fact that the petitioner's representative attended the proceedings before the Committee
(appointed by this Court in terms of order dated 7.11.2006 in Civil Writ Petition No.15503 of 2006) and was also afforded an opportunity of hearing, no such details were produced before the Committee as well.

6. In this case, it is illogical to argue that the details aforementioned are contained in Annexure P5, dated 27.2.2006.

The details contained in Annexure P5 cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, be said to be relatable to the contents of Annexure P8, dated 31.7.1006. Even at the time of hearing before us, no effort was made on behalf of the petitioner to produce any documentary proof in support of the averment that the deficiencies pointed out by the inspection team had been met and intimated to respondent No.1, vide Annexure P8, dated 31.7.2006.

7. The Committee, appointed in terms of order dated 7.11.2006 of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.15503 of 2006, conducted its proceedings in the presence of the representatives of the Management of the concerned Institutions. The records of those Institutions are recorded to have been perused by the committee which also afforded an opportunity of hearing to all the Management representatives including the representative of the petitioner-Institution. The petitioner is not proved to have made any presentation before the Committee that the infrastructural deficiencies pointed out by the inspection team, vide Annexure P6, had been removed.

As would be evident from the perusal of para no.3 of this judgment, the Committee examined the records of the petitioner-Institution and after noticing that though it did have four net qualified lecturers before the cut off date i.e. 20.9.2006, it had not provided any other information regarding the recruitment of three adhoc lecturers upto 20.9.2006. It was for want of relevant information that the team was unable to verify whether the college had requisite teaching staff as stipulated in the Govt. Memo dated 11.9.2006 or not. It is, thus, too late for the day for the petitioner to argue that the Committee finding proceeds on a factually incorrect premise.

8. Insofar as the payment of the demanded continuation fee is
concerned, that too would not solve the riddle for the petitioner. It is a matter of common observation that such like demands are raised in routine.

As would be apparent from a perusal of Annexure P-11 (i.e. the impugned letter vide which the continuation fee for the period 2006-07 had been demanded), it is addressed to “The Principal of all the Colleges affiliated to this University. The mere addressing of this letter by the University would not, in any manner, enable the petitioner to plead for the raising of an
inference that the affiliation for the period 2005-06 (which is in controversy in the present writ petition) stood granted. The grant of affiliation has to be a positive and conscious act on the part of the University. The drawal of the advocated inference would not, at all, be in order particularly when there is a positive finding recorded by the inspecting team that the record presented before it by the management and also perused by it did not indicate
compliance on the part of the petitioner qua the fulfilment of the
infrastructural deficiencies pointed out earlier and vide Annexure P-10 dated 11.08.2006 as well. The inference aforesaid would not be allowable particularly when the similarly circumstanced institutions (including the petitioner) had already been addressed vide letter dated 20.07.2006 (Annexure P-7) to intimate the action taken by them qua the fulfilment of the infrastructural deficiencies which had been pointed out while granting the provisional affiliation to them for the academic session 2005-06.

9. The position that can, thus, be safely culled out from the above
discussion is as under:-

While granting provisional affiliation to the petitioner for the
academic session 2005-06, certain conditions had been imposed upon it by the N.C.T.E. As the fulfilment of those conditions had not been intimated by the petitioner, a reminder dated 20.7.2006 (Annexure P-7) was issued by respondent No.1. The Committee (appointed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 15503 of 2006) inspected the records of the petitioner and also heard its management representative on 22.11.2006 and recorded a positive record-based finding that, “this College was given provisional affiliation for the session 2005-06. But no regular lecturer was appointed for the entire session. The College was well aware that it is obligatory on them to recruit proper teaching staff before the admissions of 2006-07. After examining the record of this college, it was observed that the college was having four NET qualified lecturers before the cut off date i.e. 20.9.2006. The college did not provide any information regarding the recruitment of 3 ad hoc lecturer upto 20.9.2006 and the University could not verify whether the college had requisite teaching staff as stipulated in the Govt. Memo. Dated 11.9.2006.

Thus the college could not be given permission to admit the students for the current session having failed to meet the requirements of staff as explained.

On the basis of the above facts, the committee finds the action taken by the University to be as per rules.” Except the bald averment in the course of arguments, there is nothing on the record to indicate that the finding aforementioned recorded by the Committee is factually incorrect. The enclosures averred to have been enclosed with letter dated 31.7.2006 (Annexure P-8)
have not been seen the light of the day till date. Those enclosures were also not produced before the Committee.

10. For the reasons recorded in the preceding paras, we find no
force in the petition. The Committee findings are not proved to be suffering from any factual or rule-related infirmity.

11. Dismissed.

( S. D. ANAND )
JUDGE

( J. S. KHEHAR )
JUDGE

MANAGING COMMITTEE BVN COLLEGE Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ANR CWP 19144 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


DATE OF DECISION: December 4, 2006

Managing Committee ….Petitioner
VERSUS
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and another Respondents

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA

PRESENT: Shri Deepak Sibal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).
During the course of arguments, it has been pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the Court record CWP No.18642 of 2006 filed by the present petitioner on the same cause of action was got dismissed as withdrawn on November 27, 2006 and in view of the aforesaid fact, the present petition is not even maintainable.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition with a liberty to the petitioner to seek its other appropriate remedies, in accordance with law.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as aforesaid.

(Viney Mittal)
Judge

(H.S. Bhalla)
Judge

GAUTAM AND ANR Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 18500 OF 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P NO.18500 OF 2006

Date of decision : December 01, 2006

Gautam and another ............Petitioner
Vs.
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar ...........Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S BHALLA

Present:
Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. D.S Patwalia, Advocate for respondents no. 1 and 2.
Mr. R.S Bajaj, Advocate for respondents no. 3 and 4.

Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)
The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of direction to the respondents to allow them to attend classes, condone their attendance shortage and allow them to appear for the final exams of the 5th Semester of the B.A.LL.B. Course being offered by the Lovely Institute of Law, Phagwara.

During the course of the arguments, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners states that the petitioners would be satisfied if the
directions are issued to the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar respondent no.1 to consider the claim of the petitioners for condonation of lectures. Learned cousnel specifically states that petitioners would not press their claim for migration which, at one stage, had been made by them before the respondent-University.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents have no objection to this limited prayer of the petitioners being allowed.

Consequently, we dispose of the present petition with a liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar-respondnet no.1 within a period of seven days from the date a copy of this order is received. On receipt of the aforesaid representation, the competent authority of the University may take an appropriate decision as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of one week from the date of filing of the aforesaid representation, in accordance with law, keeping in view the fact that the career of the petitioners is also involved.

Copy of this order be given under the signatures of the Special Secretary attached to this Court.

( VINEY MITTAL )
JUDGE

( H.S BHALLA )
JUDGE

DARSHAN SINGH Versus G N D U AND ANOTHER CWP 16742 OF 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : September 28, 2006

Darshan Singh ............Petitioner
Vs.
Guru Nanak Dev University and another ...........Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S BHALLA

Present:
Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the present petition be dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh
petition on the same cause of action by giving better particulars and by appending all the relevant documents.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid.

In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, C.M No.3356 of 2006 has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

( VINEY MITTAL )
JUDGE

( H.S BHALLA )
JUDGE

PARMINDER SINGH Versus G N D UNIVERSITY AND ANR CWP 19618 of 2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: November 09, 2006

Dr.Parminder Singh son of Naranjan Singh, resident of House No.8, Village Biring, P.O. Jalandhar Cantt., District Jalandhar .....Petitioner
VERSUS
1.Guru Nanak Dev University Amritsar, through its Registrar, Amritsar.
2.Sh.Rajesh Sharma, Lecturer, Department of Music, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
.....Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K S GAREWAL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R S MADAN

PRESENT:
Mr.BS Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.DS Patwalia, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr.BR Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No.2.

R S MADAN, J.
By filing the Civil Writ Petition No.19618 of 2002, the petitioner has sought this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ, order or direction, especially in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the appointment of respondent No.2 as Music Lecturer by respondent No.1 being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and further the writ of mandamus directing respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner for the post of Music Lecturer, being more qualified and meritorious.

It is further the case of the petitioner that the
advertisement No.2/2001 was published in the Classified, Newspaper by respondent No.1 for the post of Lecturer(Music), on 21-7-2001, copy of which is annexed as Annexure P-1, in which the applications were invited for the post of Lecturer (Music) at Sr.No.1, which were to reach in the Office of respondent No.1 latest by 14-8-2001. It is also mentioned therein that the said post was reserved only for the handicapped person/blind, in the Grade of Rs.8000-13500/-. Respondent No.2 was appointed on adhoc basis on 8-8-2001 without following the proper procedure and his selection amounted to backdoor entry.

It is further the case of the petitioner is that he is M.A., M.Phil and Ph.D. in Music (Vocal) from Kurukshetra University and copies of degrees of M.A., M.Phil and Ph.D. in Music(Vocal) from Kurukshetra University are annexed as Annexures P3, P4 and P5 respectively. He is suffering from 75% permanent disability, as is evident from the disability certificate (Annexure P2) issued by the Civil Surgeon, Jalandhar on 14-9- 2000.

In pursuant to the said advertisement, 7 persons had applied for the aforesaid post but only 6 persons were called for the interview excluding the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he being highly qualified and more meritorious deserves the post of Lecturer.

Therefore, the action of respondent No.1 is against the principle of natural justice in ignoring the claim of the petitioner.

Upon notice, respondents appeared and two sets of written statements have been filed.

In written statement filed on behalf of respondent No.1, it was denied that the selection of Rajesh Sharma-respondent No.2 is a backdoor entry but his appointment has been made by the Selection Committee on merits. In fact, the petitioner along with respondent No.2
participated in the selection process and as per the recommendations of outcome of the result by the Selection Committee, he cannot now challenge the said selection. In fact, respondent No.2 had worked as Lecturer in Music (Vocal) on adhoc basis from 24-8-2001 to 30-4-2002 on fixed salary of Rs.10,000/-.

This appointment had been made by the Vice Chancellor of the University on the recommendations of the Head of Department of Music against an existing vacant post and the same was later approved by the Syndicate of the University in its meeting held on 27-9-2001. This post was again advertised by advertisement No.1/2002 and published in the
“Tribune” newspaper on 15-6-2002.

Thereafter again the selection process as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations was followed and the Selection Committee recommended the name of Rajesh Sharma-respondent No.2. Resultantly, he was offered appointment as Lecturer in Music (Vocal) by the Vice Chancellor from 11-7-2002 to 31-3-2003 at a fixed salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. This appointment was also approved by the Syndicate in its meeting held on 23-8-2002.
It is the case of the respondent that under the statute 9.1 (i) of GNDU Calendar, 1999, Volume 1 page 22, the Vice Chancellor has the power to make an emergent temporary appointment for a period not exceeding one year Respondent No.2 is not only M.A. Music but has also qualified the UGC Test (Net) which is essential for the post of Lecturer. His
qualification and experience as per the application form has also been taken into consideration. He falls under the category of blind person with 100% disability being blind by both eyes after Bomb blast injury, as is evident
from the disability certificate (Annexure-R2/9) issued by the Civil Surgeon, Amritsar.

Even then the petitioner has also appeared for the second advertisement in which 11 candidates had applied for the post of Music
teacher, out of which 8 candidates appeared for the interview including the petitioner before the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee after considering on the merits of the candidates, again recommended the name of respondent No.2, who was offered appointment as Lecturer (Music) by the Vice Chancellor from 11-7-2002 to 31-3-2003 at a fixed salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. Even this appointment was also approved by the Syndicate in its meeting held on 23-8-2002.

Respondent No.2 has also taken up the similar plea by describing the details of his academic qualifications and experience.

The only grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been called for the interview by the Selection Committee. He is more qualified candidate than respondent No.2. On the asking of the Court to the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents are in possession of the interview proceedings of the candidates made by the Selection Committee as well as that after the Selection Committee recommended the name, the same was approved by the Syndicate where the name of the petitioner was also figured as one of the candidates, who has appeared in interview before the Selection Committee, upon which the learned counsel was unable to convince us that the petitioner has not appeared before the
Selection Committee.

We are of the view that a person's qualification and eligibility for the appointment is not the only criteria which is to be taken into consideration.

It is the wisdom of the Selection Committee which has to see suitability as well as merit of the candidate and his/her performance while making a selection for the post of Lecturer as Music Teacher. No infirmity and illegality in the process of selection has been brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

In net result, we do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

( R S MADAN )
JUDGE
( K S GAREWAL )
JUDGE

SHIVALIK PRIMARY SCHOOL SOC (REGD ) and OR Versus GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY ASR and ORS CWP 15503 OF 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : November 07, 2006

Shivalik Primary School Society and others ........Petitioners
Vs.
GNDU and others ...........Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S BHALLA

Present:
Mr. Ajay Tewari, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Sukhdip Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondent no.2.
Mr. D.S Patwalia, Advocate for respondent no.1.
Mr. V.S Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent no.3.
Mr. Anupam Gupta, Advocate for respondent no.4.

Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)
The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of directions to respondents to include the petitioners in the counselling for admission to B.Ed Course for the academic session 2006-07. The aforesaid relief has been sought by the petitioners by claiming that a permanent recognition had been granted to it by National Council for Teacher Education-respondent no.3 to run a B.Ed College for the academic session
2006-07 and the petitioners had complied with all the conditions/stipulations and the norms as required by NCTE regulations, UGC and stipulations laid down by the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and the State of Punjab. The petitioners have also maintained that the requisite faculty staff (including the Principal) had been appointed by the petitioners on or before Septemeber 18, 2006 i.e before the cut off date fixed by the State Government in consultation with the various Universities in the State of Punjab. Factual aspects with regard to the appointment of the faculty staff have been seriously disputed by the respondent-Guru Nanak Dev University. It has been maintained that the petitioners had not appointed the requisite staff, as per norms and as per decision taken by the State Government and Universities prior to the cut off date. Sh. D.S Patwalia, learned counsel for the respondent-Guru Nanak Dev University has maintained that the cut off date was fixed as September 20, 2006.

During the course of arguments, we have found that there is a serious dispute on facts and arguments have been addressed by all the
learned counsel for the parties on the factual aspect of the matter.

Keeping in view the fact that certain factual issues are required to be determined before any relief can be granted to the petitioners, as
claimed by it, Sh. Ajay Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has requested the Court to relegate the matter to a Committee
which may comprise of the Secretary or Additional Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Punjab and the Vice Chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar (or the Registrar, so desired by the Vice Chancellor) which may go into the factual aspect of the matter as to whether the petitioners had fulfilled all the requisite requirements prior to the cut off
date, if any.

Sh. Sukhdip Singh Brar, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the State of Punjab has no objection if the aforesaid request made on behalf of the petitioner is accepted. Sh. D.S Patwalia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar also very fairly states that the request made by the petitioner may be accepted to that limited extent.

Keeping in view the aforesaid agreement between the learned counsel for the parties, we direct that a joint meeting of the Secretary
(Additional Secretary, if the Secretary is not available),Department of Higher Education, Government of Punjab, and Vice Chancellor (or the Registrar, if so desired by the Vice Chancellor) of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar shall be held within a period of 2 weeks from today.

The information of the date of meeting of the aforesaid committee will be given to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by Sh. D.S Patwalia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University. The petitioners would be at liberty to place all the material which is available with it to satisfy the Members of the Committee with regard to the factual aspect to the effect that all requisite stipulations had been complied with by the petitioners before the cut-off date, if any. It would be open to the Committee to take into consideration any other relevant fact which is brought to its notice by the petitioners or the University.

If the Committee is satisfied that the petitioners had so complied with all the stipulations before the cut-off date, if any, then, in such a situation, obviously further action shall be taken in accordance with law.

Present petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Special Secretary attached to the Bench.

( VINEY MITTAL )
JUDGE

( H.S BHALLA )
JUDGE

PREM PAUL VERMA Vs GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY AND ORS RSA 445 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

RSA No.445 of 2006

Date of decision: October 13, 2006.

Prem Pal Verma ...Petitioner(s)
v.
Guru Nanak Dev University and Ors. ...Respondent(s)

Present:
Shri Raman Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
This regular second appeal is preferred by the plaintiff, whose
suit for declaration challenging the order of his dismissal from service, has been dismissed by both the courts.

[2]. The appellant was working as an Assistant in the respondent- University. His son was a student of B.Arch. The competent authority served the appellant with three charge-sheets dated 25.8.1994, 18.10.1994 and 11.1.1995. The brief charges levelled against the appellant were as follows:-

1. That he was instrumental in increasing the marks of his son Suresh Kumar, Roll No.1062 in B.Arch - 7th Semester Examination Session February 1992 (4th year of 1st Semester)
from 209 to 269.

2. That for this personal ends, the marks of Navtej Singh Roll No.1063 of B.Arch - 7th Semester were increased from 209 to 269.

3. That he was tampered with the University record for his personal ends and thereby acted in a manner unbecoming of a
University employee.

[3]. The appellant replied to the charge sheets, however, the same having been found unsatisfactory, a regular inquiry was ordered. The Inquiry Officer gave full opportunity to lead evidence to both the parties and upon consideration thereof, submitted his reports dated 18.6.1995, copies of which have been placed on record as Annexures A1, A2 and A3, holding the appellant guilty of the charges. It was, thus, concluded that the
appellant was instrumental in tampering with the University records thereby increasing the total marks of his son as well as some other candidates.

[4]. On the basis of above-stated findings, the competent authority dismissed the appellant from service after a proper show cause. He preferred a departmental appeal also, which, too, was turned down.

[5]. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the present civil suit which has
been dismissed by both the courts thereby giving rise to this regular second appeal.

[6]. I have heard Learned Counsel for the appellant at length and
have perused the impugned judgments.

[7]. It is well settled that in the matters like domestic inquiries, the
civil court, while exercising of its power of judicial review, would not sit as an appellate tribunal. Normally, the scope of interference falls within the narrow compass to see that:-

(i) the principles of natural justice have not been violated;

(ii) the action has been taken by the competent authority; and

(iii) the punishment awarded is not disproportionate to the proved misconduct. In other words, re-appreciation or re-appraisal of the evidence led before the Inquiry Officer is beyond the scope of judicial review.

[8]. The impugned judgments reveal that both the courts, guided by the above noted principles, have concurrently held that sufficient opportunity of being heard was afforded to the appellant by the University authorities and, thus, principles of natural justice have been duly complied with. It is not the case of the appellant himself that the disciplinary action was taken against him by an incompetent authority. As may be noticed, the
appellant wanted the courts below to return findings contrary to those of the inquiry officer and that too on re-appreciation of the material produced before the Inquiry Officer. The courts below have granted even that much indulgence, yet on appreciation thereof, the appellant has been found to manipulated enhancement of marks of his son in B.Arch.

[9]. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the punishment of dismissal is highly disproportionate to the gravity of charges. It is argued that the appellant had served more than 23 years in the respondent- University, in addition to 10 years service rendered by him in government employment prior to joining the University.

[10]. I, therefore, do not find merit in this contention. The purity in
examinations is one of the sacred and onerous duty to be performed by a University. The appellant had successfully tampered with the same purely for extraneous considerations. The allegations, as proved against him, are of grave nature and in such circumstances, his dismissal from service cannot be termed such a harsh punishment that it would prick the conscience of the court, more so, when such a deterrent action is highly desirable to flash message across in all quarters.
[11]. Consequently, this appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

[ Surya Kant ]
Judge

PARAMJIT KAUR and ANR Vs STATE OF PB and ORS Civil Writ Petition 665 of 2006


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: September 26,2006

Paramjit Kaur and another V. State of Punjab and others

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA

Present:
Shri Sandeep Arora,Advocate, for the petitioners.
Shri Sukhdip Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General,Punjab
Shri Atul Nehra, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Shri Sumeet Sheokand,Advocate, or respondent No.3.

Viney Mittal,J.
In the month of September,2005, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, respondent No.3, issued a prospectus for filling up the seats to the course of B.Sc (Nursing) in various Colleges affiliated to the University.

The petitioners had appeared for their Senior Secondary School (+2) examination held in March,2005. However, both the petitioners were placed in reappear in one of the papers each. The aforesaid reappear examination was successfully cleared by the petitioners in the month of August,2005.

The entrance examination for admission to B.Sc. Nursuing Course was held on September 21,2005. The petitioners participated in the said entrance examination. As per eligibility criteria set up by the University, as given in the advertisement, a candidate having more than 320 marks or above in general merit in Civil Writ Petition No.665 of 2006 2 PPMET-2005 was eligible to be counselled for admission. The aforesaid counselling was scheduled for September 28/29, 2005.

However, the said condition was revised subsequently. Petitioner No.1 appeared in the first counselling and was admitted to the aforesaid course in Adesh Institute of Medical Sciences, Muktsar, respondent No.4. However, petitioner No.2 claims that she did not come to know about the relaxation of condition with regard to eligibility of reappear candidates and as such was entitled to attend the first conselling. Petitioner No.1 was granted admission and deposited her dues and commenced her studies.

The petitioner claims that later on it was felt by the University that in case the criteria fixed as per the original advertisement was not relaxed, then most of the seats in the aforesaid course would remain vacant. Consequently, another notice dated October 25,2005 was issued in the Newspaper vide which it was informed that eligibility of the candidates with respect to general category was revised from Original 40% to 35% and with regard to SC/BC category, the eligibility was fixed at 25%. The last date was also extended upto October 31,2005. The second counselling was to be held accordingly. In the second counseling held on October 29,2005, petitioner No.2 Shimpa was also admitted.

She also paid her dues and commenced her studies.

Later on the petitioners have received notices from the College,respondent No.4, intimating that their admission was liable to be cancelled, since the petitioners were not eligible being reappear candidates.

However, the petitioners claim that similar candidates as the petitioners, had approached this court and on a decision taken by the State of Punjab such candidates were accommodated against the vacancies. The petitioners claim that their case is identically placed, as of the candidates who had approached this court through the various writ petitions.

Originally, the claim of the petitioners was contested by the respondents. Separate written statements were filed on behalf of
respondent No.1 and the College, respondent No.4. However, during
the course of arguments Shri Sukhdip Singh Brar,,learned Additional
Advocate General,Punjab appearing for respondent No.4, Adesh Institute of Medial Sciences, Muktsar, on instructions, has stated that
if the case of the petitioners is to be allowed by this court, then that
would result in a total strength of 63 students pursuing their studies
in the academic session 2005-06, as against the sanctioned strength
of 60 students in the College. In these circumstances, Shri Brar has
requested that if Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, respondent No.2, accepts the additional strength of three students to
continue and the admission of the aforesaid students is regularized,
the College, respondent No.4 agrees to have an intake of 3 students less for the academic session 2006-07.

We find that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the hardship faced by the petitioners, the offer made by Shri Brar on behalf of respondent- College is absolutely fair and justified. In view of the aforesaid fact and circumstances and also keeping in view the fair offer made by Shri Brar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-university, Shri Atul Nehra has also no objection to the acceptance of the aforesaid offer.

In view of the aforesaid agreed stand between the learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is allowed.

admission of the petitioners in the Bachelor of Sciences ( Nursing)
Course for the academic session 2005-06 shall stand regularized.

However, respondent No.4, Adesh Institute of Medical Sciences,
Muktsar shall abide by the undertaking given on its behalf by the learned counsel and admit three students less than its intake capacity in the next academic session 2006-07. The result of the petitioners for the examination in which they have appeared under the interim orders passed by this court shall also be declared by the respondent-university forthwith.

Before parting with this order,we make it clear that this order has been passed on the basis of the agreement between the parties and shall not be used as a precedent to admit more students than its sanctioned intake capacity so as to secure a similar benefit later on.
Copy of the order be given dasti on usual payment.

(Viney Mittal )
Judge

( H.S.Bhalla )
Judge

JAN NAYAK Vs G N D U AND ORS CWP 11288 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH


Date of decision September 7, 2006

Jan Nayak Singh .......Petitioner
Versus
Guru Nanak Dev University and others ........Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA

Present:-
Sh. Inderjeet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Sh. Kanwaljit Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Sh. Pawan Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Sh. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1,4 and 5.

Written statement on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5 has been filed in Court and the same is taken on record. Copy thereof has been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

At the outset Sh. Kanwaljit Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 states that besides the two seats available for M.B.A. course in the categories of tsunami victims and scheduled castes and two seats in MCA Course in General Category, another seat has become available in MBA Course as per the instructions communicated to him.

In view of the statement made by Sh. Kanwaljit Singh,
learned counsel appearing on behalf respondent No.2, Sh. Inderjeet Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent University seeking requisite relief.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.

(VINEY MITTAL)
JUDGE

(H.S. BHALLA)
JUDGE

Revaluate 21 PMET questions, CBSE told

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today asked the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to constitute a high-powered committee of experts to revaluate the 21 controversial questions that were part of the PMET 2005 examination conducted by Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.

These are the questions whose answers are alleged to be wrong or ambiguous by the petitioner challenging the result of the second examination for PMET 2005.

The Bench of Mr Justice J.S. Khehar and Mr Justice S.N. Aggarwal also directed the Director, CBSE, to ensure that the committee, comprising two experts each for the four subjects of PMET examination, submitted its report on or before July 27.

An official of the rank of Assistant Registrar of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has also been deputed to go to New Delhi with the relevant record submitted by the petitioners as well as respondent university.

However, the Bench expressed satisfaction over the manner in which the examination was re-conducted by Guru Nanak Dev University. It noted that the university not only had the courage to allow students to examine their own answer sheets after the declaration of the result but had allowed them to check the answer-sheets of other students also. “This speaks volumes about the transparency in the entire process,” the Bench observed.

Today, during hearing, counsel for the petitioners again reiterated that answers of 21 questions were either incorrect or ambiguous, university counsel denied the accusation. He stated the university stand that the answers were not only correct but were the most appropriate ones for each of the questions.

A group of 34 selected candidates also moved the High Court, opposing any move to quash the result. They stated that they had already been selected through a thorough process and they could not be made to suffer for follies that were not theirs.

While involving the CBSE in the matter of 21 questions, the Bench noted that since teaching experts of each of the four subjects drawn from Guru Nanak Dev University had found nothing wrong in the questions or the answers, the only course left was to get them examined from independent experts. “The university, we feel, should not be party to any re-valuation process,” the Bench observed.

It may be recalled that on the last hearing, the Bench had restrained Baba Farid University, Faridkot, for holding counselling of PMET-2005 candidates till final disposal of the writs. Counselling of the candidates had been scheduled for July 20-24.

Petitioners Saumil Garg and 36 other candidates are seeking quashing of the result of the re-examination conducted by the university on June 30 as also an inquiry into the conduct of the examination.

The petitioners have stated that answers to as many as 21 questions had incorrect code keys. Hearing will now resume on July 28.

Meanwhile, the Registrar of Guru Nanak Dev University, Mr R.S. Bawa, said the university will challenge today’s decision of the High Court in the Supreme Court. “The CBSE is not a higher body than Guru Nanak Dev University. Its own paper was reported to have leaked sometime back,” Mr Bawa said.


Act against GND varsity Registrar

The petitioners on whose petition the Punjab and Haryana High Court had scrapped the evaluation of answer-sheets by Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, have moved the High Court seeking review of the August 8 order.

In its order, the Bench of Mr Justice J.S. Khehar and Mr Justice S.N. Aggarwal had directed the Guru Nanak Dev University Vice-Chancellor to get all the answer-sheets re-evaluated on or before August 17 on the basis of answer-keys corrected by an independent agency.

In their application, Saumil Garg and other students have prayed that in view of reports, the Guru Nanak Dev University should be restrained from having anything further to do with the re-valuation of the answer sheets re-evaluated on or before August 17 on the basis of answer-keys corrected by an independent agency.

In their application, Saumil Garg and other students have prayed that in view of reports, the Guru Nanak Dev University should be restrained from having anything further to do with the re-valuation of the answer sheets as ordered by the Bench. They have also prayed that appropriate orders be passed for conduct of an inquiry into the conduct of the second examination.

The petitioners have also sought action against Guru Nanak Dev University Registrar R.S. Bawa and any other officer who may be involved in the attempt to allegedly mislead the court by filing a “false affidavit”.

Media reports had quoted Guru Nanak Dev University experts as saying that they had pointed out ambiguities in the 21 disputed questions and their answers and had not told the university that the answers were correct.

Referring to media reports, the petitioners have accused the university officials of having filed false written statements to claim that Guru Nanak Dev University experts had again checked the 21 controversial questions whose answers were alleged to be wrong or ambiguous by the petitioners. Saying that the respondents, including Mr Bawa, filed false written statements despite having the knowledge that the answer key to some of the questions was wrong, the petitioners have added that the action of the Guru Nanak Dev University officials is “totally contemptuous and an attempt to interfere in the administration of justice’

They have also alleged that Mr Bawa committed perjury and wasted valuable time and money. Mr Bawa has also been accused of concealing material facts, deliberately filing false statements and causing pecuniary loss to the petitioners.

Interestingly, the petitioners have also accused the Guru Nanak Dev University experts of concealing facts from the court. Pointing out that of the eight experts mentioned in the written statement, five experts were present in the courtroom during the hearing. One of the experts even assisted a counsel in answering queries of the Bench. However, not even a single expert informed the court that they had not re-checked the 21 questions and their answers.

The application is likely to be taken up tomorrow for hearing.

Re demarcation of varsities jurisdiction delayed

The re-demarcation of the jurisdiction of three universities of the region, namely Panjab University, Punjabi University and Guru Nanak Dev University, has been delayed and it may now be done from the next academic year. The change in the jurisdiction of these universities is not possible now as the academic sessions for the year 2001-2002 have already been started by the universities. The mid-session transfer of areas is not possible according to Dr S.P. Singh, Vice- Chancellor, Guru Nanak Dev University.

“Moreover, the Punjab Cabinet has also not taken a final decision on the recommendations of the Council for Higher Education regarding the re-demarcation of the jurisdiction of these universities, he said.

The council has recommended that the colleges located in Ferozepore district should be transferred to Guru Nanak Dev University. These are at present affiliated with Panjab University. Similarly colleges located in Nawanshahr and Ropar districts are to be transferred to Panjab University. These are with Guru Nanak Dev University at present. The colleges of Moga and Muktsar which are affiliated with the Panjab University will be shifted to Punjabi University.

The regional centre of the Punjabi University at Mohali will go to Panjab University while the regional centre of the Panjab University at Muktsar will come under Punjabi University.

The Senators of the Panjab University belonging to the areas to be shifted to other universities had been assured that they would retain their membership, said Dr S.P. Singh. He said the teachers of the universities would also have the option to join any university

Sh Palvinder Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Palvinder Singh,
17, Hargobind Avenue, Sher Shah Suri Road,
Back side Bhalla Colony,
Chheharta, Amritsar.
__________ Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer ,
O/o Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. _________ Respondent

AC No. 270 of 2007

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) Sh. Yadavinder Singh,Clerk,Legal Cell,on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard.

The information required by the appellant has been given to him by the respondent in compliance with the orders of the Court dated 14-9-2007.

Disposed of.


(Kulbir Singh) (P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner, State Information Commissioner

Dr Jaspal Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Jaspal Singh,
# 13, Rana Mill,
Opposite Sandhu Avenue,
Chheharta, Amritsar. ….Complainant.

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. …Respondent.

CC No. 1014 of 2007

ORDER

Present:
Dr. Jaspal Singh, Appellant in person.
Shri Lakhbir singh, Assistant Registrar Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
Shri Harbhajan Singh , Advocate both on behalf of PIO.


Information in question relates to the number of Government, Govt. Aided and Private Degree Colleges affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

2. Information was demanded in respect of six items. The Complainant states that partial information has been delivered. The Respondent states that information is required to be collected from a number of colleges and this is being collected. He demands that the Complaint should pay the cost of correspondence between the university and the colleges. This plea for payment (by the Complainant) of the amount spent by the Respondent on correspondence is not tenable. According to RTI Act, the Complainant is required to make payment at the rates stipulated in the rules that is simply Rs. 2/- per page in addition to the application fee of Rs. 10/-. At the same time, the stipulated period for delivery of information is 30 days. Since this period has already elapsed, (the original application having been made on 23-2-2007) the Complainant is entitled
Contd…..P/2

to this information free of cost. The information in question should be supplied to the Complainant within the next one month.

3. To come up for confirmation of compliance on 13-8-2007.

4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

(Rajan Kashyap)
Chief Information Commissioner
Amritsar



Lt. Gen.P.K.Grover (Retd.)

State Information Commissioner

Dr Jaspal Singh versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Jaspal Singh,
# 13, Rana Mill,
Opp. Sandhu Avenue,
Chheharta, Amritsar.
….Appellant.

Vs


Public Information Officer,
O/o the Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. …Respondent.

AC No. 188 of 2007

ORDER

Present:
Dr. Jaspal Singh, Appellant in person.
Shri Lakhbir Singh, Assistant Registrar Guru Nanak dev University, Amritsar
Shri Harbhajan Singh , Advocate both on behalf of PIO.


The Appellant had sought information from the Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar in regard to appointments of Assistant Registrars in the University. The Respondent had supplied certain information on the items listed. Regarding one item namely, ” Why I (Appellant) was not called for the interview?”, the Respondent states that this is a matter of opinion and, thus, is not covered under the RTI Act. That is the reason, why information in respect of this item had not been delivered.

2. We accept the stand of the Respondent. Information can be given in response to a specific demand on matters of fact. The information pertaining to facts has been duly delivered. The Respondent states that if any other information on facts is required, the Appellant is free to make a fresh application. The Respondent clarifies that whereas initially, appointments to the posts of Assistant Registrars were contemplated from the open marked by direct recruitment and also through promotion, it was later decided by the University not to make any appointments from the open market but to make all appointments Assistant Registrars by promotion only. As a consequence of this, no one from the open market was considered for appointment as Assistant Registrar.

3. The Complainant, on the other hand, submits that the qualifications of the persons appointed to the posts of Assistant Registrar by promotion should be intimated to him in terms of his request. We see no reason why this information viz; qualifications of persons promoted as Assistant Registrars be not supplied.

4. We direct, therefore, that the Respondent should give information to the Complainant, under intimation to the Commission, about the qualifications of the persons promoted as Assistant Registrars.

5. To come up for confirmation of compliance on 13-8-2007.

6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.



(Rajan Kashyap)
Chief Information Commissioner
Amritsar



Lt. Gen.P.K.Grover (Retd.)

State Information Commissioner

Smt Arun Sharma versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

State Information Commission, Punjab,
SCO No.84 -85, Sector 17 C , Chandigarh.

.Smt. Arun Sharma,
B-IX/34 Malkana Mohalla,
Kapurthala.

………….Complainant
Vs

The Public Information Officer,
O/o..The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. ………….Respondent

CC 172 No. of 2007

Present:
i) Sh. Vijay Sharma on behalf of the complainant .
ii)Sh. Lakhbir Singh, Asst..Registrar,GNDU,and S. Harbhajan Singh,Legal Advisor, on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard

Of the two items of information asked for by the complainant, the information in respect of the first item has been provided to the complainant by the respondent in the Court today. Insofar as the second item is concerned, the respondent has given documents to the complainant to show that the attested copy of the advertisement issued by the Hindu Kanya College, Kapurthala in 1984 was not sent by the college to the University besides their best efforts to obtained the same.

Disposed of.



(Kulbir Singh) (P.K.Verma)

State Information Commissioner, State Information Commissioner

About University

Guru Nanak Dev University was established at Amritsar on November 24,1969 to mark the 500th birth anniversary of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji. It is both a residential and an affiliating university. In conceiving the future course of the University, the objectives enshrined in the Guru Nanak Dev University Act 1969, emphasised that the new University would make provision for imparting education and promoting research in the humanities, learned professions, sciences, especially of applied nature and technology.

Studies and research on the life and teachings of Guru Nanak, in addition to working towards the promotion of Punjabi language and spreading education among educationally backward classes and communities were the other commitments. In consonance with these expectations, the University in its eventful history of 35 years has taken long strides in spreading the message of the Guru and promoting education in such fields as science, arts, management, information technology, industrial technology, environment, planning and architecture. Carefully nurtured by committed academia, the University has carved a niche for itself in the academic world.

The motto of the University as engraved on its emblem Guru's wisdom illumines all speaks of the vision and idealism for which the University stands. Spread over a stretch of 500 acres towards the west of the City, Guru Nanak Dev University presents a picture of modern architecture. Traditional red brick geometrical blocks represent its regard for time-honoured values and commitment to scientific advancement. Making its humble beginning in an annexe of the adjoining Khalsa College, the University today boasts of 37 academic departments, two regional centres, two colleges and a score of support service departments besides several administrative offices. In recent years, the University has diversified in a big way its programmes into applied sciences making it one of the distinguished centres of industry related job-oriented courses.

It is highly innovative in designing its teaching and research programmes and offers a comprehensive range of general and applied courses. Very early on, it decided to restructure its syllabi on the basis of recommendations made in the reports of the Curriculum Development Centres (1988). Admission to courses at all levels is made strictly on the basis of National, state and University level entrance tests. At present, nearly 5000 students are studying on the Campus, 4 College, All India Services Training Centre, Instrumentation Centre, Computer Centre, 24 hour internet facility, Placement Unit etc.

To promote research among its faculty, almost all the Departments have been provided with independent computer facilities, internet connectivity and departmental libraries. In addition to the academics, the University has also created necessary facilities for recreation and all round development of students and faculty in the form of Department of Youth Services, National Service Scheme, a 900 seat all purpose auditorium, half a dozen seminar and conference halls, a modern hi-tech sports complex, sports hostel, faculty club, students' centre, health centre, day care centre, two separate holiday homes at Dalhousie for teachers and students, working women hostel, Baba Buddha College Bhawan along with oncampus residential facilities for a large number of students, teachers and administrative staff. The Campus with its lush green grounds, swaying fields, blossom laden tree lined lanes provides a most conducive physical environment for work and progress.

The University takes pride in the fact that its community over the years has developed a great participative work culture. The University has won Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Trophy 17 times and inter-versity youth festival championship four times consecutively. UGC has granted the University Centre for Excellence in Sports Sciences. National Assessment and Accreditation Council accredited the University at the "Five Star Level". Being rated at such a high level will inspire its community to make strides ahead still faster and stronger with academic excellence and commitment to social upliftment as the core ideals. a very large number of them being girl students drawn from the neighbouring countryside.

The University has contributed tremendously in accessing higher education to women in this otherwise educationally backward area. Being an affiliating University, it also .performs the parenting role of directing and monitoring the academic programmes of more than 100 colleges located in the five districts of Amritsar, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Nawanshehar and Gurdaspur, some of which have a long and creditable history of imparting higher education since late nineteenth century. Over the years, the University has built up an excellent academic infrastructure in the form of a well stocked computerised library, state-of-the-art laboratories, Academic Staff.

Introduction

Guru Nanak Dev University, or GNDU, was established at Amritsar, India on November 24, 1969 to commemorate Guru Nanak Dev's birth quincentenary celebrations. Guru Nanak Dev University campus is spread over 500 acres (2 km²) near village of Kot Khalsa, some eight kilometer west of the Amritsar City on Amritsar - Lahore highway, next to Khalsa College, Amritsar.

GNDU is a both residential and an affiliating university. In conceiving the future course of the University, the objectives enshrined in the Act 1969, emphasised that the new university would make provision for imparting education and promoting research in the humanities, learned professions, sciences, especially of applied nature and technology. Studies and research on the life and teachings of Guru Nanak, in addition to working towards the promotion of Punjabi language and spreading education among educationally backward classes and communities were the other commitments.

Campus

Guru Nanak Dev University campus is spread over 500 acres (2 km²) near village of Kot Khalsa, some eight kilometer west of the Amritsar City on Amritsar - Lahore highway, next to Khalsa College, Amritsar. GNDU presents a picture of modern architecture. Traditional red brick geometrical blocks represent its regard for time-honoured values and commitment to scientific advancement. Making its humble beginning in an annexe of the adjoining Khalsa College, the University today boasts of thirty seven academic departments, two regional centres, three constituent colleges and a score of support service departments besides several administrative offices.

In addition to the academics, the University has also created necessary facilities for recreation and all round development of students and faculty in the form of Department of Youth Services, National Service Scheme, a 900 seat all purpose auditorium, half a dozen seminar and conference halls, a modern hi-tech sports complex, sports hostel, faculty club, students' centre, health centre, day care centre, two separate holiday homes at Dalhousie for teachers and students, working women hostel, Baba Buddha College Bhawan along with on campus residential facilities for a large number of students, teachers and administrative staff. The Campus with its lush green grounds, swaying fields, blossom laden tree lined lanes provides a most conducive physical environment for work and progress. The University takes pride in the fact that its community over the years has developed a great participative work culture.

History

Guru Nanak Dev University was started on November 24, 1969 to mark the celebration of the 500th birth anniversary of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

Guru Nanak Dev University is both a residential and an affiliating university. GND University offers diversified programmes into applied sciences that make it one of the distinguished centres for industry related job-oriented courses. It has won the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Trophy and has been accredited with a Five Star status by National Assessment and Accreditation Council of UGC. The University has hugely contributed in accessing higher education to women belonging to educationally backward area.

Educational Streams

Guru Nanak Dev University has been imparting education and promoting research in the humanities, learned professions, sciences, especially of applied nature and technology. The University provides a highly innovative teaching and research programmes and offers a comprehensive range of general and applied courses. Centre for Immigration studies for primary research-oriented study of Literature and Social Sciences, has been established at GND University to promote interaction among the immigrant literati and the indigenous ones.

Facilities
Guru Nanak Dev University provides all the necessary facilities for recreation and all round development of students and faculty in the form of Department of Youth Services, National Service Scheme, a 900 seat all purpose auditorium, half a dozen seminar and conference halls, a modern hi-tech sports complex, sports hostel, faculty club, students' centre, health centre, day care centre, two separate holiday homes at Dalhousie for teachers and students, working women hostel, hostel with on-campus residential facilities for a large number of students, teachers and administrative staff. Apart from the basic facilities, the University set up its own Health Centre that provides free medical help to all students, teachers, staff and their dependents and retired persons. All the departments of the University are equipped with independent computer facilities, internet connectivity and departmental libraries.

Faculties/Departments

* Applied Sciences
* Arts & Social Sciences
* Economics & Business
* Engineering & Technology
* Humanities & Religious Studies
* Languages
* Laws
* Life sciences
* Physical Education
* Physical Planning & Architecture
* Sciences
* Sports Medicine & Physiotherapy
* Visual Art & Performing Arts


Courses

Courses Offerd by Gurunanak Dev University
BLib & Inf Science
BLib & Inf Science
B Architecture
LLB
BSc (Hons School) Chemistry
BPharmacy,
B.Tech.
M.A.
M.Sc. (Hons. School) Economics.
Master of Business Economics
M.P.Ed
M.Lib. & Inf. Science
LL.M.
M.Pharmacy
M.Com.
Master of Sports Physiotherapy,
MCA
MBA
M. Sc (Hons.)
M. Sc
M. Phil

Vice Chancellor Profile

Name : Professor Ajaib Singh Brar, Vice Chancellor
Telephone : 0183-2258811,0183-2258822
Fax : 0183-2258820
Email : vc@gndu.ac.in

Profile
Dr. Ajaib Singh Brar, a senior Professor, Chemistry and joint Professor, Centre for Polymer Science and Engineering, at Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi has a vast experience of more than 33 years of working in the field of education and research at prestigious National and International Institutes in various capacities. Prof. Brar did his B.Sc. from Faridkot, Punjab and M.Sc. from Punjabi University, Patiala. He did his Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi and got UNESCO fellowship in 1974. After completing Ph.D., he joined Guru Nanak Dev University and served there for six years. Prof. Brar has worked in the field of catalysis, Mossbauer spectroscopy, photochemistry and currently in the field of NMR spectroscopy of polymers. He has international recognition in these fields.

Prof. Brar joined IIT Delhi as Assistant Professor in 1982. He has published more than 210 papers in refereed International and National journals and 50 papers in the proceedings of conferences / symposia. Prof. Brar has delivered 115 lectures in conferences / symposia at various institutes /universities. He has delivered invited lectures at American Chemical Society conferences and at leading universities in USA, Europe and Japan. He delivered lectures in Japan on the invitation of JSPS and in The Netherlands on the invitation of The Royal Academy of The Netherlands for Arts and Science. Prof. Brar is having research collaboration with RWTH, Technical University, Aachen, Germany (ranked as the best Technical University in Germany). He was a visiting faculty at RWTH, Aachen during June-July in 2005 and 2006. Prof. Brar has guided 25 Ph.D. students and 20 M. Tech. students. He has sponsored projects of Rs. 1.50 crores and established High Resolution NMR Center at IIT Delhi.

Prof. Brar was Chairman GATE (Graduate Aptitude Test for Engineering) 2002, 2004 and JMET 2002, 2004. He was chairman for conducting DRDO-SET2004 (Defense Research and Development Organization - Scientist Entrance Test), entrance test through which, about 600 scientists were recruited for various DRDO laboratories. He was Head of Chemistry Department, IIT Delhi . Prof. Brar was awarded Outstanding Research Award, IIT Delhi in 1994 He is Fellow of the "National Academy of Sciences", India.. Professor Brar was appointed Vice-Chancellor, University of Lucknow on 6th January 2008. As Vice-Chancellor he has brought various reforms in the University administration through his transparent and effective governance . His main focus has been on high quality in teaching and research and to promote efficiency and transparency in administrative work. Prof. Brar as Chairman, CPMT-2008 ( Uttar Pradesh )successfully organized this prestigious examination of the state in an exemplary manner. On September 23rd 2008 University of Lucknow conferred Degree of D.Lit ( Honoris Causa) on Hon'ble H.E. Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil, the President of India. Prof. Brar is member of the Society, Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow, the body which governs the I.I.M., Lucknow. He is member of Governing Council of CBMR, SGPGI, Lucknow. Professor Brar has been awarded prestigious 'U.P.Ratan award' by all India Conference of Intellectuals in 2008 and was recently awarded ' Saraswati Samman' in 2009 in recognition of his services in the field of Education. As Vice-Chancellor his main focus is to energize and streamline various systems in teaching, examination, research as well as in the administration of the University. He is the reviewer to almost all reputed International Journals in his research field. Prof. Brar is member of various National Committees in the field of education and research and is also the member of various Selection Committees of several Universities and Institutes of higher education in the country.

Looking into the commendable work done by Prof. Brar at Lucknow University the Governor Punjab & Chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University has appointed him Vice-Chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. He has joined the University on 15th of July, 2009.

Registrar Message

It gives me immense pleasure to inform that Guru Nanak Dev University is perhaps the first University in the region which has introduced tools of new Information Technology to its various functions. The University have totally computerized their examination wing. This has helped in an early and with more accuracy, declaration of results and also enabled the candidates to take various competitive examinations.

The University has also developed its own separate website for Administration. This site is providing all types of information to its prospective candidates on a global scale. All important information has been made available on the site including the examinations results. This effort will definately ensure the students and public at large an easy and instantaneous access to information.

However, this effort has been possible only with the able guidance, inspiration and blessings of our worthy Vice-Chancellor, and of course hard work of our efficient and dedicated staff who have really taken it as a new challenge. I wish all concerned success in their life, and a bright and prosperous future for all the students.

(Dr. INDERJIT SINGH)
REGISTRAR

Many a scandal rock GNDU

Countless probes into minor and major issues haunt the teaching and non-teaching departments of Guru Nanak Dev University.

The issues nagging the staff include overstay in public accommodation, travelling bills and minor clerical errors. Though certain quarters welcome the investigations, a larger section is furious over making of mountains out of molehills due to vested interests and over-activism of senior authorities.

About six teachers are facing probes related to jaunts, while a number of non-teaching staff members have been heavily fined for administrative mistakes. Alleging vendetta, they are planning to take up the issues with their respective unions. A senior functionary in the Sports Department was heavily fined for over-staying in the official accommodation, while a senior professor is facing probe because he engaged an official peon in helping him shift to a new accommodation.

Plagiarism charges have tarnished the image of the university. A senior reader in the Department of Commerce and Management has been charged with copying, but no allegations have been levelled against his co-author. 'This discrimination is spreading distrust. The inquiries have to be just,' said a senior teacher.

The row over termination of services of Finance Development Officer Varindepal Sharma backfired, but not before the university spent lakhs of rupees on inquiries and court cases.

The much-hyped case related to fraud committed by a clerk at Gurdaspur Regional Centre may also lead to no logical conclusion, as the accused has started naming higher-ups.

GNDU Teachers' Union president Sharanjit Singh Dhillon said, 'These issues will be discussed in the general body meeting that will be held shortly.' He added that later they would speak with the Vice-Chancellor on the matter.

GNDU Non-teaching Association president Swaranjit Singh echoed Dhillon's statement. However, GNDU Registrar Dr RS Bawa said, 'Complaints are looked into as soon as they are made.'

07.01.2009

Vice Chancellor Jai Rup chanllenged jursidiction to probe by Punjab Government

Govt has no right to start probe against me: Jai Rup

Guru Nanak Dev University Vice-Chancellor Jai Rup Singh, in a missive to inquiry officer Principal Secretary B.C. Gupta, has categorically stated that the state government has no jurisdiction to initiate probe against him and hence it may be dropped/closed.

Instead of appearing before the inquiry officer at the Punjab Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, the VC today attended his office here and interacted with a three-member delegation from the Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy, USA.

The confidential letter of the Jai Rup Singh reads: 'I am not supposed to submit myself to such an action which is not supported under the law or is not as per the terms and conditions of my appointment'.

According to sources, the VC had informed the Governor that he was open to any inquiry provided it was ordered after following the proper procedure. He said it was a question of the sanctity of the office of the VC. 'I will stand by every signature put on any paper in my capacity as VC since I took over two years ago. I have nothing to conceal because all decisions were taken unanimously and in transparent manner', he said.

Regarding the allegations, Jai Rup Singh reportedly told the Governor that former FDO Varinder Pal Sharma was signatory to most of the financial matters which were mentioned in the complaint.

The letter further reads: 'In these circumstances, taking cognisance of the complaint of Valtoha, which is motivated, false, frivolous and baseless, and appointing an inquiry officer, is clearly without jurisdiction and a breach of the GNDU Act'.

He said the appointing authority of the VC is the chancellor who has appointed him for a period of three years. Under the law, the chancellor alone determines his conditions of service.

He said similar complaints, under the signatures of Varinder Pal Sharma, were moved against him to the Punjab Governor (also chancellor of the university), who had sought comments on those complaints. The comments on those complaints with all supporting records/documents were sent. 'So far I have not received any expression of dissatisfaction with the replies/comments to those complaints from the chancellor', he said.

The VC, in his complaint, alleged that Valtoha, the complainant, is a thick friend of Sharma and it seemed that it was at the instance of Sharma that MLA has moved the same complaints against him under his signatures of which cognisance has been taken by the government without asking him to offer his comments thereon.

Under the GNDU Act, under which I have been appointed, does not contemplate or empower the government to conduct any such disciplinary or other inquiry against the VC, he said.

However, the VC told the inquiry officer that he had gone through the complaint carefully and all allegations mentioned therein had already been replied to the chancellor from time to time and these are within chancellor's knowledge/consideration.

'Therefore, in view of the above, it is respectfully submitted that since the matter is already under consideration of the chancellor, the state government has no jurisdiction to initiate any such inquiry against him,' he added.
21.06.2008

Nirmal Pandhi, Dr Jaspal Singh Randhawa urges not to make GNDU as political playground

GNDU becomes political playground

Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) campus is slowly turning into a playground for political games. While the ruling SAD (B) is speaking against Vice-Chancellor Dr Jai Rup Singh, many senators, teachers and principals of various colleges today came out in his support.

At least 25 members of the Senate today sent a missive to Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, apprising him of the 'vilification campaign' launched by certain elements to defame GNDU.

Claiming that the campaign was being pursued by people with vested interests, the senators said, 'The university is progressing in the fields of academics, sports and cultural activities, and attracting best students and placements.'

They also brought to the notice of the CM the democratic and transparent functioning of various university bodies, like Senate, Syndicate, Academic Council, Board of Studies and asked him to intervene to maintain 'autonomous status' of the institution.

The Principals' Association of Non-Government Affiliated Colleges of Guru Nanak Dev University also passed a resolution, expressing resentment over the rising 'political interference' in the working of the GNDU.

Nirmal Pandhi and Dr Jaspal Singh Randhawa, president and general secretary of the association, respectively, said the V-C's straightforwardness was not being liked by some persons with political links. The Guru Nanak Dev University Teachers' Association (GNDUTA) also held its executive's emergency meeting on the campus and condemned the inquiry being ordered by the state government against V-C on 'flimsy complaints'. Some inquiries are being ordered just to defame the university in pursuance of political vendetta,' said GNDUTA secretary Dr Sukhpreet Singh, adding that the teachers would start a peaceful agitation if the interference did not stop.

Dr Jai Rup Singh was being targeted by Akali MLA from Valtoha Virsa Singh following the suspension of varsity's Finance Development Officer (FDO) Varinderpal Sharma. Valtoha had rapped the V-C for certain promotions and recruitments, which he alleged were against the university calendar, the charges Dr Jai Rup denied.

The V-C had also met Governor Gen SF Rodrigues (retd) and apprised him of the campaign initiated by Valtoha. The CM, who was here today, denied any political interference and said there were certain complaints raised in the assembly and he had asked the House to decide if they wanted an inquiry. 'And the House decided that there should be an inquiry into various allegations against V-C. We have nothing against him and if he is clean he should not fear,' said CM.
21.06.2008

Dr Jai Rup Singh not appeared before Home Secertary

Amritsar, June 20 Says he has replied to Governor
Guru Nanak Dev University Vice-Chancellor Dr Jai Rup Singh, who is facing the state government's probe, did not depose before the Home Secretary today in Chandigarh.

The V-C, who was busy throughout the day at his office and addressed a US delegation, said he was answerable only to the Governor, who is the Chancellor of the university and no one else.

The V-C was supposed to depose before Principal Home Secretary BC Gupta, who has been directed by the state government to inquire into various allegations against him related to promotions, recruitments and financial irregularities.

The campus has turned into a playground for politics after SAD (B) MLA Virsa Singh Valtoha trained guns at the V-C following the dismissal of university's Finance Development Officer (DFO) Varinderpal Sharma.

Valtoha has also accused the V-C of not taking the calls of the political representatives who wanted to speak to him on certain public issues. He raised the matter in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha during the last session and the House decided to institute an inquiry. 'An officer of the rank of Principal Home Secretary is too junior to head an inquiry against the V-C whose status is higher as per the protocol,' said sources close to the V-C.

Meanwhile, the promotion of a professor in the Architect Department and holding of interviews for the post of Director, Centre for South Asian Studies are the new allegations being raised against the V-C by the disgruntled elements.

The 25-member Senate had yesterday written to CM Parkash Singh Badal, apprising him of the vilification campaign launched by certain elements to defame GNDU and the V-C.

Though the Guru Nanak Dev University Teachers' Association (GNDUTA) also held the executive's emergency meeting yesterday and condemned the 'so-called' inquiry being ordered by the state government on flimsy complaints, the association's head Dr Davinder Singh today distanced himself from the meeting's decisions.

'The meeting was held without fixing the agenda and the GNDUTA should not have discussed such issues which are not under its purview,' he said.

However, GNDUTA secretary Dr Sukhpreet Singh said the state government was unnecessarily interfering in the matter and they would start a peaceful agitation if the V-C was made the target for political reasons. 'Some inquiries have been ordered just to defame the university,' he said.

However, the VC said he had already sent a detail reply on the allegations made against him to Governor Gen SF Rodrigues (retd) and the state government should seek his permission before initiating any probe.

He said all the allegations against him were false and baseless and he had replied them point-wise to the Chancellor, saying that all the promotions and recruitments had been done as per the university calendar. The CM had yesterday said some allegations against the V-C were levelled by Valtoha following which the government had ordered the probe.

NAWANSHAHR:Calling it an attack on the autonomy of the university, the Association of Principals of Non-Government Colleges, GNDU, has criticised the holding of an inquiry by a bureaucrat into allegations against GNDU Vice-Chancellor. They urged the Punjab Governor and the CM to intervene in the matter. Nirmal Pandhi and Dr Jaspal Singh Randhawa, president and secretary, respectively, of the association in a press release issued here, said GNDU V-C Dr Jai Rup Singh was known for his honesty, integrity and disciplinary approach in academic and administrative matters. His approach had not been liked by persons involved in spreading anarchy on the campus in connivance with their political friends. And as Dr Jai Rup Singh did not succumb to political pressure, he was facing this trouble, said Dr Randhawa.

21.06.2008

Experts blame PMET mess on paper setters

Amritsar, August 25, 2005
Even as the Guru Nanak Dev University authorities remained busy throughout the day in preparing a fresh PMET merit list to meet the 72-hour deadline fixed by the Supreme Court, the Vice-Chancellor seems to be in a tight spot in fixing responsibility of the senior teachers who were allegedly responsible for the 'mess' and finalising the answer key.

In a letter to the Guru Nanak Dev University Teachers Association (GNDUTA), four of the eight experts alleged that they were not responsible for the PMET mess and a 'wrong affidavit' was filed by the Registrar in the court to make them 'scapegoats'. Representatives of the GNDUTA held a marathon meeting with the Vice-Chancellor, Dr S.P. Singh, in his office, but failed to reach a consensus.

The four subject experts in their missive said: 'The statements of the questions, the choice of the answers and the key to the right answer are the sole responsibility of the paper setters. Till date, the university has not disclosed the names of the paper setters. It is alleged that the PMET papers were not set by renowned experts. Instead, the papers were set from guides (kunjis) available in the market.'

In the academic field, the imposition of Rs 1 lakh cost by the apex court by describing the entire exercise of conducting the PMET as on 'apathetic and casual approach' is a big blot on the name of the university, which was given five stars by NAAC.

Sh Sarbjit Singh Verka versus Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) Amritsar

State Information Commission, Punjab,
SCO No.32-34,(1st Floor), Sector 17 C , Chandigarh.
Sh. Sarbjit Singh Verka,
Principal Investigator,
PHRO,
22, Sector 2-A,
Chandigarh.
…………Appellant
Vs

The Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Guru Nanak Dev University,
Amritsar. ………….Respondent

AC No. 157 of 2006

Present:
i) Sh.Manjit Kumar, Clerk , on behalf of the appellant.
ii) Shri Alok Jagga, Advocate, and S. Lakhbir Singh, Asstt. Registrar,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The respondent has sent a reply to the appellant vide their letter dated 16-5-2007 in compliance with the orders of this Court dated 26-4-2007.

The Counsel for the appellant has requested for an adjournment since he has gone abroad and will be returning in the first week of July,2007.

The request is accepted and the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 12-7-2007 for final orders.




(Kulbir Singh) (P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner State Information Commissioner

Dated 14th June, 2007

Colleges affiliated with this University

Total number of colleges affiliated with this University = 150
1 Aakarshan College of Education, Dinanagar
2 Amardeep Singh Shergill Memorial College, Mukandpur
3 Anand College of Education for Women, Jethuwal Village
4 Apeejay College of Fine Arts, Jalandhar
5 Apeejay Institute Of Design, New Delhi
6 Apeejay Institute of Management and Information Technology (AIMIT), New Delhi
7 Army Institute of Higher Education, Pathankot
8 Baba Banda Singh Bahadur College of Education, Dhariwal
9 Baba Budha College, Tarn Taran
10 Baba Mehar Singh Memorial (BMSM) College of Education, Gurdaspur
11 Baba Saheb Ambedkar Institute Of Technology and Management, Delhi
12 Baba Sang Dhesian, Jalandhar
13 Baring Union Christian College BUC, Batala
14 Bebe Nanaki Khalsa College for Women, Dhariwal
15 Bebe Nanaki University College Mithra, Kapurthala
16 BLM Girls College, Nawanshahr
17 Chacha Satya Pal Tuli Memorial College of Education, Pathankot
18 Cheema College of Education, Gurdaspur
19 CT Institute of Higher Studies Shahpur, Jalandhar
20 DAN College of Education For Women, Nawanshahr
21 Dashmesh College of Education Adda Kotli Surat Malhi, Gurdaspur
22 DAV College for Boys, Amritsar
23 DAV College of Education for Women, Amritsar
24 DIPS College of Education, Jalalpur
25 DIPS College of Education, Dhilwan
26 Doaba College, Jalandhar
27 DRV DAV Centenary College, Phillaur
28 GGS Government College Jandiala, Jalandhar
29 Gian Sagar College, Kalanaur
30 GN Khalsa College for Girls, Jalandhar
31 GN National College, Nakodar
32 GN Prem Karamsar College, Nadala
33 GNBL Ramgarhia College for Women, Phagwara
34 GNDU College, Chung
35 GNDU Government College, Patti
36 GNDU Guru Ram Dass School of Planning and Architecture, Amritsar
37 GNDU Regional Campus, Jalandhar
38 GNDU Regional Center (GTB Govt College), Sathiala
39 GNDU Regional Centre, Gurdaspur
40 GNDU University College of Arts Science and Commerce, Narot Jaimal Singh
41 GNN College for Women, Nakodar
42 Golden College of Education, Gurdaspur
43 Government College, Ajnala
44 Government College, Bholath
45 Government College, Tarn Taran
46 Government College, Gurdaspur
47 Government College for Boys, Amritsar
48 Government College of Education, Jalandhar
49 Government GN College, Kala Afghana
50 Government Sports College, Jalandhar
51 GRD College for Women, Phagwara
52 GTB Institute of Commerce and Management, Khankot
53 Guru Arjan Dev Institute of Higher Studies, New Delhi
54 Guru Arjun Dev Khalsa College, Chohla Sahib
55 Guru Gobind Singh College of Education, Kapurthala
56 Guru Gobind Singh College of Education, Dhariwal
57 Guru Gobind Singh Khalsa College, Sarhali
58 Guru Nanak College, Batala
59 Guru Nanak College, Phagwara
60 Guru Nanak College for Women, Banga
61 Guru Nanak Dev University College, Verka
62 Guru Nanak Institute of Management and Information Technology, New Delhi
63 Guru Nanak Khalsa College, Jalandhar
64 Guru Nanak Khalsa College, Sultanpur Lodhi
65 Guru Nanak Nav Bharat College, Narur Panchhat
66 Hans Raj Mahila Vidyalaya, Jalandhar
67 Hargobind Institute of Management and Information Technology, New Delhi
68 Hindu College, Amritsar
69 Hindu Kanya College, Kapurthala
70 Hindu Kanya Mahavidyalaya, Dhariwal
71 Innocent Hearts College of Education, Jalandhar
72 JDS College of Education, Kot Village
73 Kamla Nehru College for Women, Phagwara
74 Kamla Nehru College of Education For Women, Phagwara
75 KC College of Education, Nawanshahr
76 KCL Institute of Laws, Jalandhar
77 Khalsa College for Women, Amritsar
78 Khalsa College of Education, Amritsar
79 Khalsa College of Education (Ranjit Avenue), Amritsar
80 Kirpal Sagar College of Education Dariapur, Rahon
81 KRM DAV College, Nakodar
82 Kundal Lal Goyal MDSD College For Women, Kapurthala
83 Lord Krishna College of Education, Sultanpur Lodhi
84 Lovely Institute of Education, Jalandhar
85 Lovely Institute of Higher Studies, Phagwara
86 Lyallpur Khalsa College for Women, Jalandhar
87 Lyallpur Khalsa College of Boys, Jalandhar
88 Lyallpur Khalsa College of Education for Women, Jalandhar
89 M.R.S Punjab Police Acadaemy, Phillaur
90 Mata Ganga Girls College, Tarn Taran
91 Mata Gujri College, Balwanda Village
92 MGN College of Education, Jalandhar
93 MGSM Janta College, Kartarpur
94 MK College of Education, Jalandhar
95 Mohan Lal Memorial Institute of Education for Women, Mudhal Village
96 Mohan Lal Memorial Institute of Education MLM Mudhal, Amritsar
97 Mohan Lal Uppal DAV College, Phagwara
98 NJSA Govt College, Kapurthala
99 Om Parkash Memorial Institute of Education, Dayalpur
100 Paradise College of Education, Jalandhar
101 Prem Chand Markanda SD College for Women, Jalandhar
102 Pt Mohan Lal SD College for Girls, Gurdaspur
103 Pt Mohan Lal SD College for Girls, Fatehgarh Churian
104 PTM Arya College, Noor Mehal
105 Ramgarhia College, Phagwara
106 Ramgarhia College of Education, Phagwara
107 RK Arya College, Nawanshahr
108 RR Bawa DAV College for Girls, Batala
109 RRMK Arya Mahila Maha Vidyalaya, Pathankot
110 Sai College of Education, Jadla
111 Sant Baba Bhag Singh Institute of Education, Khiala Village
112 Sant Baba Dalip Singh Memorial (SBDSM) Khalsa College, Domeli (Dumelli)
113 Sant Baba Hazara Singh College of Education, Chhina Village
114 Sant Hira Dass Kanya Maha Vidyalaya, Kala Sanghian
115 SD College for Women, Sultanpur Lodhi
116 Sewa Devi SD College of Education, Tarn Taran
117 SGAD College, Khadoor Sahib
118 Shaheed Bhagat Singh College of Education, Patti
119 Shaheed Darshan Singh Pheruman Memorial College for Women, Rayya
120 Shahzada Nand College, Amritsar
121 Shivalik College of Education, Gurdaspur
122 Shri Raghunath Girls College, Amritsar
123 Shri Vishwa Mitter Sekhri College Of Education, Batala
124 Sikh National College, Banga
125 Sikh National College, Qadian
126 SL Bawa DAV College, Batala
127 SMDR SD College, Pathankot
128 SMDR SD College of Education, Pathankot
129 SPSK Khalsa College, Begowal
130 SR Government College for Women, Amritsar
131 SRC SD Kanya Maha Vidyalaya, Pathankot
132 Sri Fort College of Technology and Management, New Delhi
133 Sri Guru Angad Dev College of Education, Khadoor Sahib
134 Sri Guru Arjun Dev Government College (SGAD Govt College), Tarn Taran
135 Sri Guru Teg Bahadur College of Education, Khankot
136 Sri Sai College of Education, Pathankot
137 SRPA Adarsh Bhartiya College, Pathankot
138 SRSPM College (GNDU Constituent College), Niari
139 SSM College, Dinanagar
140 SSSS College of Commerce for Women, Amritsar
141 St Soldier College, Phagwara
142 St Soldier College (Co-Ed.), Jalandhar
143 St Soldier College Basti Danashmandan, Jalandhar
144 St Soldier College for Women, Jalandhar
145 St Soldier College of Education, Jalandhar
146 St Soldier Law College, Jalandhar
147 Swami Sarvanand College of Education, Dinanagar
148 Trai Shatabdi Guru Gobind Singh (GGS) Khalsa College, Amritsar
149 Trinity Institute of Management and Technology, New Delhi
150 Viswa Institute for Further Education, New Delhi


Some other Colleges in Punjab
SBRS College for Women, Ghuduwala Sadiq Village
Jand Sahib Road
Ghuduwala Sadiq Village (District Faridkot)
Punjab
Gurukul School of Nursing, Kotkapura
Bathinda Road
Kotkapura (District Faridkot)
Punjab
Industrial Training Institute (ITI), Rajpura
Deshmesh nagar
Rajpura (District Patiala)
Punjab
Non Teaching Staff Union of Private Colleges in Punjab and Chandigarh, Jalandhar

Jalandhar (District )
Punjab
BBL College of Education, Lehragaga
Plot NO. – 50//19/24, 50//20/2/1
Lehragaga (District Sangrur)
Punjab
© www.punjabcolleges.com : Engineering Colleges and deemed Universities in India      Disclaimer