HC relief to 'ex-IPS' turned professor Rajnish Rai

Gujarat high court. File photo

In a relief to "ex IPS" officer Rajnish Rai, who has joined the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad (IIMA) as an assistant professor, the Gujarat high court on Wednesday ordered the state and union governments to maintain status quo with regards to his contentious voluntary retirement.

The court orally clarified that status quo means "no departmental proceeding or interfering with his new employment" that is at IIMA.

The division bench of justices S R Brahmbhatt and justice A P Thaker ordered that, "Status quo as on today be maintained by both the sides which shall be finally governed by final outcome of the proceedings."

The bench passed the order after stating "let a time-limit be fixed" so that the central administration tribunal (CAT), Ahmedabad could be requested to complete the hearing of Rai's application. 

The 1992-batch IPS officer, known for supervising Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter and arresting many officers including D G Vanzara, had moved CAT in December 2018 challenging union government's decision that rejected his request for voluntary retirement.

After rejecting his request, the government also issued a chargesheet for his unauthorized leave and later suspended him. Rai has challenged both the issues before the CAT and the matters have been pending for nearly eight months. In the meanwhile, Rai joined IIMA as an assistant professor. He then moved the high court seeking relief.

The Ministry of Human Resource Department (MHRD) issued a show cause notice to the institute objecting to employing the officer in view of his retirement issues. MHRD sent two such notices. Rai's lawyers have informed the court about these developments and the court orally slammed the government, saying that such notices amounted to "interference."

The state and union sought time for seeking approval of officers for this arrangement. The lawyers representing both the governments said that they would like to file in writing about these observation of the court and hence, the hearing was scheduled for August 20.

Comments (+)