Dr. Rupamanjari Ghosh vs Jawaharlal Nehru University

$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7596/2023
Date of decision: 13.04.2026
IN THE MATTER OF:
DR. RUPAMANJARI GHOSH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhik Chimni, Ms Pranjal Abrol.
Mr. Gurupal Singh, Ms Moksha
Sharma Mr Ayan Dasgupta
Samarendra, Advocates.

versus

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Vasanth Rajasekaran, Senior
Standing Counsel, JNU; Mr. Karan
Prakash, and Mr. Harshvardhan
Korada, Advocate on Bali Ms.
Deepshikha Kumar, Advocates.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
J U D G E M E N T

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)


1. The instant petition is filed seeking to quash and set aside Office
Order dated 05.08.2022, bearing file No. Estate/2022 and Office Order dated
11.04.2023 bearing file No. Estate/126/V/Uk/2023-24 issued by respondent
Jawaharlal Nehru University.
2. A perusal of the record indicates that the petitioner, on 01.11.1988
was appointed at the post of Assistant Professor of Physics in the respondent
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR
SHARMA
Signing Date:24.04.2026
16:44:48

university. During the course of her employment, vide letter dated
05.03.2012, the petitioner informed the university that she had been offered
the position of Founding Director, School of Natural Sciences, Shiv Nadar
st
University (SNU) and that she would need to join SNU on or before 1 July
2012 as a founding member.
3. She sought for extraordinary leave (EOL) without pay from JNU for
st
5 years starting 1 July, 2012 and informed the university that she plans to
stay in her current JNU residence for the said period on payment of rent as
per rules.
4. The petitioner was initially granted extraordinary leave for a period of
two years vide Office Order No. 654, to join Shiv Nadar University as a
founding member. The commencement of the said leave was subsequently
amended to 03.07.2012. The said period was thereafter extended by one year
vide Office Order No. 1145 with effect from 03.07.2014, and by a further
period of two years vide Office Order No. 1388 w.e.f. 03.07.2015.
Consequently, the petitioner remained on extraordinary leave (EOL) till
02.07.2017.
5. Meanwhile, the petitioner applied for voluntary retirement from
University services, which was accepted by the respondent with
retrospective effect from 03.07.2012 vide letter dated 28.06.2017. It is to be
noted that the date of commencement of the EOL was 03.07.2012. The
petitioner continued to occupy the University accommodation till
29.09.2017.
6. The respondent university, by invoking Rule 10.4 of the JNU House
Allotment Rules (hereinafter referred to as „the housing rules‟), raised a
demand of INR 32,97,814/- toward penal rent at double the market rent for
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR
SHARMA
Signing Date:24.04.2026
16:44:48

overstaying the University accommodation. The over stay is sought to be
attributed to the petitioner on account of her accepting voluntary retirement
with retrospective effect. Rule 10.4 is extracted as below:-
“ Any employee retaining the accommodation beyond the permissible limit
prescribed in Rule 10.2 will be charged penal rent equal to double the market
rent unless he has sought and obtained prior approval of the competent authority.
In exceptional circumstances, the Vice Chancellor on the recommendation for a
period of not exceeding 4 months beyond the permissible limit prescribed in Rule
10.2 on normal licence fee ”


7. The office order dated 03.04.2012, issued by the respondent
university, references Rule 10.2 of Rules for Allotment of Residences that
permitted retention of university accommodation. The relevant portion of
said office order is extracted as under:-

In case the teacher is an allottee of the University
“
accommodation, she would be allowed to retain the University
accommodation in terms of Rule 10.2 of Rules for Allotment of
Residences.

She will deposit the amount on account of her membership of
LIC Group Savings Linked Insurance Scheme and CGHS for the
entire period of EOL with the Finance and Accounts Department and
send receipts thereof to the DR (SC/ST Cell). In respect of CGHS, the
card can be surrendered (and in that event no recovery will be made).
If these essential formalities are not completed within 15 days from
the date of issue of this order, the staff member will lose membership
of the above schemes) automatically. In the case of LIC-GSLIS, no
insurance cover will be granted to defaulter but her membership may
be renewed from the next anniversary date (20 September every year),
if requested in writing in time and if permitted by the LIC.

All other terms and conditions of grant of leave shall be
governed by the Ordinance for Regulating Leave to Teachers of the
University.

This has the approval of the competent authority. ”

8. Rule 10.2(vii) of the housing rules allows for the retention of
university accommodation for the duration of the EOL. The relevant portion
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR
SHARMA
Signing Date:24.04.2026
16:44:48

reads as under :-
“ 10.2 Allotment of a residence shall come to an end automatically
on the happening of any of the following events mentioned below. The
employee of his legal representatives, as the case may be, on their
written request may be allowed grace period mentioned against each
event in col.2 below, to vacate the premises. The grace period will not
confer any right on the allottee/legal representative as the case may
be:
(i)….
...
(vii) Deputation/ contract/ EOL to accept an assignment – For the
duration of contract/ assignment.”

9. It is thus seen that the petitioner remained on EOL till 02.07.2017.
Even while accepting the voluntary retirement, there was no express
condition that required her to deposit the rentals/HRA. During said period,
her retention of the university accommodation continued to be governed by
Rule 10.2(vii) of the housing rules and the office order dt.03.04.2012. After
having accepted the petitioner’s voluntary retirement, the respondent could
not, thereafter, treat the petitioners' occupation of the accommodation for the
period falling within the Office Order as unauthorized.
10. The respondents have submitted that the petitioner had accepted INR
23,99,988/- as housing rent allowance from SNU vide letter dated
25.07.2017. However, the impugned demand does not indicate that mere
acceptance of such allowance by itself would render the petitioner’s
occupation unauthorized so as to attract Rule 10.4.
11. The office order dt.03.04.2012 confers a vested right in favour of the
petitioner to avail university accommodation as per Rule 10.2(vii) for the
duration of the EOL. In the absence of an express bar within the housing
rules, acceptance of voluntary retirement in a retrospective manner cannot
convert an occupation that was lawful when enjoyed, into an unauthorized
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR
SHARMA
Signing Date:24.04.2026
16:44:48

occupation warranting imposition of penal rent as per Rule 10.4.
12. This Court is of the opinion that the petitioner’s entitlement to retain
accommodation was governed by the office order dt.03.04.2012 read with
Rule 10.2(vii) of the housing rules. The condition of accommodation in this
regard was not liable to be altered or modified to the prejudice of the
appellant by a subsequent administrative act, which was given retrospective
effect from 03.07.2012.
13. For all those reasons, the impugned demand is unsustainable and the
same is, therefore, set aside.
14. With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition stands disposed
of.

(PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV)
JUDGE
APRIL 13, 2026
Nc






Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR
SHARMA
Signing Date:24.04.2026
16:44:48