President as visitor competent to terminate services of RGNAU employee: SC

The Supreme Court has ruled that the President has the authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings and terminate the services of the Rajiv Gandhi National Aviation University's first registrar.


PTI | New Delhi | Updated: 21-05-2026 19:18 IST | Created: 21-05-2026 19:18 IST
President as visitor competent to terminate services of RGNAU employee: SC
  • Country:
  • India

The Supreme Court on Thursday held that the President, being the ''visitor'' of the Rajiv Gandhi National Aviation University, was competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings and terminate the services of the university's first registrar.

Setting aside the finding of the Allahabad High Court that such action was without jurisdiction, a bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe did not agree with decision that had held that the visitor and the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) lacked jurisdiction to take disciplinary action against employees of the Rajiv Gandhi National Aviation University (RGNAU).

The case pertained to Jitendra Singh, the ''first registrar'' of RGNAU.

Appointed in 2019 under the transitional provisions of the RGNAU Act, Singh's tenure was marked by intense litigation. His services were initially terminated during his probation in 2020, leading to a series of litigation.

After a High Court order labelled his initial termination ''stigmatic'', he was reinstated in December 2021, only to be suspended the same day pending a fresh inquiry.

Following an enquiry committee report that proved charges of indiscipline and gross insubordination, the President of India, acting as the visitor, approved his termination in April 2022.

A division bench of the Allahabad High Court had quashed this termination, ruling that the university's executive council, not the visitor or ministry officials, held disciplinary power over staff.

The top court disagreed with the High Court's interpretation of the university's law.

''In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the exercise of power by the visitor appears to be just and proper. We are, therefore, unable to concur with the finding recorded by the Division Bench of the High Court in its judgment dated May 22, 2024 that the visitor had no role in the disciplinary proceedings against the first registrar of the university,'' it said.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Give Feedback