Delhi HC refuses to set aside termination of DU Professor guilty of demanding illegal gratification from students

New Delhi [India], September 16 (ANI): The Delhi High Court in a recent judgement refused to set aside the termination of a Delhi University professor over demanding a bribe from students for attendance and marks. The High Court said that solicitation of illegal gratification from students is grave and strikes at the core of academic integrity.
Petitioner Thelma J. Talloo is a former reader in the Commerce Department at Jesus and Mary College, University of Delhi. She had challenged the order passed by a committee in 2012.
Justice Jasmeet Singh dismissed the petition moved by Thelma J Talloo, noting the proceedings of the committee were fair and the findings were supported by the evidence.
The High Court also refused to modify the order of the committe, noting that the order was earlier modified by the appeal committee.

"In view of the matter, the proceedings were fair, the findings are supported by evidence and the penalty has already been tempered by leniency. Hence, under Section 34 of the Act, no ground for setting aside or further modification of the award is made out by the petitioner," Justice Jasmeet Singh.
The High Court said that the Appeals Committee has already modified the relief by mitigating the penalty from dismissal to termination while safeguarding the retirement dues of the petitioner.
"To further substitute termination with voluntary retirement would amount to rewriting or modifying the award, which is impermissible," the bench said in the judgement passed on September 12.
For the said reasons, the High Court dismissed the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act challenging the award dated 23.10.2012 passed by the Appeals Committee constituted under Clause 9 of the Annexure to Ordinance XII of the University of Delhi.
The petitioner had challenged the order passed in October 2012 on the basis of a complaint filed by students in 2008. She had preferred an appeal against her dismissal by the governing body on July 6, 2011.
On October 23, 2012, the Appeals Committee dismissed the appeal, merely reducing the penalty from dismissal to termination so that the retirement dues of the petitioner would not be affected, the judgement said.
The high court in judgement said that the Appeals Committee upheld the guilt and considered the proportionality of punishment, substituting dismissal with termination to ensure that the retirement dues of the petitioner were not forfeited.
"The misconduct proved, namely solicitation of illegal gratification from students, is grave and strikes at the core of academic integrity, and thus, the Appeals Committee recorded reasons for affirming each of the charges against the petitioner," Justice Singh said. (ANI)