The Bombay High Court has set aside the compulsory retirement of a Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) professor, holding that merely starting a WhatsApp group without the institution’s permission could not justify bringing his long-standing career to an end when there was no finding that he had derived any personal gain from it. A Division Bench of Justice M. S. Karnik and Justice Sandesh D. Patil found the disciplinary inquiry findings perverse and the punishment grossly disproportionate. The Court directed payment of 50% back wages with continuity of service and consequential benefits.
Background
The petitioner had joined TISS on July 13, 1985 and was working as a Professor in its School of Social Work. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him over the creation of a WhatsApp group titled “TISSians Career Impact2”, allegedly without permission and using the institute’s official logo.
TISS alleged that the group operated as a parallel placement service, solicited students and alumni for the petitioner’s personal gain and amounted to engaging in a trade or business prohibited by the applicable service rules. Allegations were also made concerning the use of the institute’s logo, resources, knowledge and information.
The petitioner was suspended on March 29, 2016 under Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. A memorandum of charges followed on April 22, 2016. After an inquiry, an order dated September 6, 2017 imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement. His departmental appeal was subsequently rejected on January 16, 2018.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner argued that treating WhatsApp posts relating to career opportunities as a trade or business was perverse. His counsel challenged the fairness of the domestic inquiry and maintained that the WhatsApp messages did not disclose misconduct. It was also argued that the disciplinary authority violated the principles of natural justice and Rule 15(2) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
He further contended that he was entitled to remain in service until the age of 65 but was compulsorily retired at 58, making the punishment disproportionate. Among the decisions relied upon was the Supreme Court’s judgment in Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India on proportionality of punishment.
TISS Defends Disciplinary Action
TISS maintained that due process had been followed and that the punishment was proportionate to the allegations proved against the petitioner. Its counsel pointed to WhatsApp conversations concerning job opportunities and attempts to raise funds, while arguing that there was no evidence that permission had been obtained to form the group and conduct its activities.
The respondents also argued that the petitioner had effectively created parallel placement services and that judicial review concerned the decision-making process rather than re-examination of the correctness of the disciplinary authority’s factual decision.
High Court Finds No Evidence of Personal Gain
After examining the WhatsApp communications, the High Court noted that there was nothing indicating that the petitioner charged money for placement services. A February 23, 2016 chat concerned a CSR opportunity in Mumbai and was intended to help other members who might be interested. The Court also noted that the platform was exclusively meant for “TISSians” and that non-TISS members were to be removed.
The Court further observed that although funds were allegedly sought to be raised, there was no finding that they were used for the petitioner’s benefit. Nor was there anything to suggest that placement services were offered for consideration or that any consideration was diverted to him. Instead, members were merely sharing placement opportunities available in the industry.
The Bench also took note that the registered TISS Alums Association had neither complained about the WhatsApp group nor participated as a witness or party in the disciplinary proceedings. In those circumstances, the Court said it was difficult to understand what prejudice had been caused to TISS.
On the finding that the WhatsApp group amounted to a parallel placement service, the Court observed:
“The finding that there was a parallel placement service is totally perverse.”
While acknowledging that permission had not been obtained from TISS to create the group, the Bench held that this alone could not support such an excessive penalty.
“Merely starting a WhatsApp group by an employee without the permission of the organisation itself is not sufficient to put an end to long standing accomplished the career of a person.”
Punishment Grossly Disproportionate
Applying the principle of proportionality, the High Court relied on Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India and noted that a penalty must be commensurate with the gravity of misconduct. It also referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Omsairam Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. v. State of Odisha while discussing the doctrine of proportionality.
The Bench held that compulsory retirement was “grossly disproportionate” and that the inquiry officer’s findings were perverse. It found the punishment so strikingly excessive that interference in judicial review was warranted.
The Court also referred to Indian Oil Corporation v. Ajit Kumar Singh, cited by the respondents, noting that judicial review can be exercised where findings are such that no reasonable person could have reached them, or where they are perverse or suffer from a patent error on the face of the record.
Decision
While considering back wages, the petitioner’s counsel stated on instructions that the petitioner would be satisfied with 50% back wages. Taking this statement into account, along with the period during which he remained out of employment until attaining the age of superannuation, the Court granted the relief accordingly.
The High Court quashed the suspension order dated March 29, 2016, the compulsory retirement order dated September 6, 2017 and the appellate order dated January 16, 2018. TISS was directed to pay 50% back wages from the date of termination until superannuation, with continuity of service and all consequential benefits. Retirement benefits must be recomputed, and any arrears are to be paid within three months from the uploading of the judgment. No order as to costs was passed.
Case Details
Case Title: Dr. Swapan Garain v. Tata Institute of Social Sciences & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 1487 of 2018
Bench: Justice M. S. Karnik and Justice Sandesh D. Patil
Date: September 16, 2026
