The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) on Monday refused to stay a government of India (GoI) order on removal of the director of the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Mohali, Raghuram Rao Akkinepally.

He was sacked by the President of India, who is also visitor of the institute, on December 3. Rao had joined in May 2017 and was suspended for the second time on October 29, 2018, following direction from the President. Subsequently, a single-judge bench on November 13, 2018, had stayed the order.
Following this, the NIPER board of governor (BoG) started a fresh process for his removal this year, which culminated in December 3 order.
Rao and board of governor chairman Vishwa Mohan Katoch have been at loggerheads after the former suspended NIPER registrar PJP Waraich in 2018.
Katoch had asked Rao to revoke the suspension but the latter did not yield.
Earlier this year, Rao was served a fresh show-cause notice, asking why his service should not be terminated for not disclosing about a criminal case pending against him since 2016, in the application he had submitted for the director’s post.
The court was told that the BoG did not have jurisdiction to issue show-cause notice to him and only the institute’s visitor could have initiated the same.
It was also argued that in no way, criminal proceedings would amount to moral turpitude and/or impinge on the duties being discharged by him. It was further stated that when he had submitted the application for the post of director, charges had not been framed against him and further that the first information report (FIR) was the result of an earlier dispute with the complainant.
“I was being victimised for my bold decisions and measures to plug corruption by several elements,” Rao had argued. However, the court did not yield and only sought reply from the Centre by January 30, 2020, without staying the December 3 order, which effectively means that he will have to go now.
{{/usCountry}}“I was being victimised for my bold decisions and measures to plug corruption by several elements,” Rao had argued. However, the court did not yield and only sought reply from the Centre by January 30, 2020, without staying the December 3 order, which effectively means that he will have to go now.
{{/usCountry}}Rao had 14-day time to continue on his post after December 3 order as per a high decision in which it was mandated that if an adverse order is passed during the court proceedings, he won’t be removed for 14 days to enable him seek an appropriate remedy.