The Punjab and Haryana high court has said that Constitution allows decent criticism and an employee can’t be chargesheeted for the same. “No authority is entitled to treat the exercise of the fundamental right of freedom of speech by a citizen as misconduct,” the high court said, adding that disciplinary proceedings against a person for the same are “unconstitutional”.
The high court bench stayed suspension orders and chargesheet issued to a Hisar varsity scientist, Sandeep Kumar, who wrote to some government bodies, highlighting ‘irregularities’ in the Veterinary Council of India (VCI) and at the Lala Lajpat Rai University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (LLRUVAS), Hisar. The high court has also sought response from Umesh Chandra Sharma, president, VCI and LLRUVAS vice-chancellor major general Shrikant Sharma (retd) by November 17 on the petition of Kumar.
He was issued a chargesheet and suspension orders on August 22 for his correspondence with various government authorities without seeking permission from the university and not disclosing his identity of employment.
The high court bench noted that a letter written in May 2016 by the petitioner to VCI does not even form part of the chargesheet that, on the face of it, was prime mover of the disciplinary action against him. The letter also does not disclose any personal attack against the university where he is serving and his grievance is against the VCI for approving the Minimum Standards of Veterinary Education Regulations 2016 draft, the court observed.
As per the petition, the scientist had also questioned the nod given by the VCI to a few courses in some colleges of Punjab and Haryana, including in the university.
{{/usCountry}}As per the petition, the scientist had also questioned the nod given by the VCI to a few courses in some colleges of Punjab and Haryana, including in the university.
{{/usCountry}}The petitioner had defended his act, saying the correspondence with government bodies was made in personal capacity and nowhere his identity was revealed, hence, the action was unwarranted and illegal.
Quoting to Supreme Court judgments, it was further contended that all citizens of India have right to freedom of speech and expression which has been guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution that protects criticism in moderate language.