Tribunal orders Chandigarh Administration to name an architecture college regular principal

After deciding on and announcing the recruiting guidelines for the position, the Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has ordered the UT Administration to choose a regular principal for the Chandigarh College of Architecture. The Bench overturned the Administration’s decision, which had temporarily transferred the applicant’s major responsibility to UT Chief Architect Kapil Setia in addition to his own responsibilities.

The Bench has made a decision about an application that Professor Sangeeta Bagga submitted via attorney Rohit Seth two years ago.

After Bagga was issued an extra charge by the college administrator, which was later removed and assigned to Setia, on July 19, 2022, Bagga approached the tribunal. On July 22, 2022, the tribunal had halted the order’s execution while notifying the Chandigarh Administration of her request. The visit has persisted ever since.

Bagga had requested in the suit for the UT ruling to be quashed, describing it as arbitrary and illegitimate. She also requested the issuing of directives for her to stay in her position as principal until a regular appointment was scheduled, as she was the most senior professor with a PhD and was thus completely competent to occupy the position. She also asked the responses for instructions on how to quickly and permanently fill the position.

Speaking on Bagga’s behalf, Seth argued that, as the college’s most senior faculty member, the applicant was granted the additional responsibility of principal on September 21, 2017. He said that in the past, special interests have leveled nebulous and baseless allegations against her. All of the concerns, he said, were proved to be unfounded.

Seth said that she was the only lecturer with a required PhD degree. As a result, the Administration assigned her the extra responsibility of principal.

The attorney contended that the Chief Architect of UT was unfit to serve as principal. According to him, the administration’s decision to award the Chief Architect the extra responsibility of the college principal amounted to a reconsideration of the previous orders that had granted the applicant the charge. Given that the applicant still had 12 years of service remaining as of today, it was punitive that she was abruptly removed after five years in the way it had been done.

The bench said in the ruling, “We instruct the UT Administration to finalize and announce the recruitment regulations and finish the procedure for recruitment and appointment of a regular principal in the case indicated above. The current arrangement will remain in place until the scheduled appointment is made. Subject to her work and behavior, the applicant will maintain the extra fee as the most senior professor with a PhD until the normal arrangement is created. We see no cause to change the current setup, hence A1 is hereby annulled and OA is partially permitted.