Chandigarh, Nov. 16 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court has imposed a fine of Rs.10 lakh on Mohali-based premier national institute, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) and ordered re-instatement of assistant professor Neeraj Kumar, compulsory retired a decade ago. "We find that malice in law is apparent on record and, therefore, we cannot shut our eyes to the gross injustice meted out to the appellant (Kumar)," the bench of justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and justice Rohit Kapoor said while allowing the pleas from Kumar and imposing a cost of Rs.10 lakh on NIPER for "unjust treatment" meted out to him. The court, however, has given liberty to NIPER to conduct an inquiry and fix responsibility in the matter and recover the cost from the person responsible. Kumar had not hired a lawyer and presented his case himself. However, the court had appointed an amicus curaie in the case- senior advocate DS Patwalia. The court has ordered Kumar's reinstatement forthwith as assistant professor and directed that he be allowed to serve uninterruptedly and that his claims for promotion to associate professor and professor be considered by treating his service as "continuous and uninterrupted." However, he would not be entitled to salary for the period he did not actually work. He was ordered to be removed from service in 2013 and subsequently punishment was changed to compulsory retirement. It was these decisions he had challenged before the high court. The allegations against Kumar were of indulging in insubordination and misbehaviour with seniors, harassment of one scheduled caste student, vitiating atmosphere of the department, disrupting academic activities and levelling false and baseless allegations against seniors. As per proceedings Kumar had questioned the constitution of a selection committee constituted 2009, which led to a series of actions culminating in the compulsory retirement order of the petitioner. The court found that Kumar had been objecting to the action of NIPER, on the ground of it violating the provisions of applicable law. His complaints were found to have "substance and many of such actions were also set aside by the court". "Till the time when the appellant raised the objections against the constitution of the selection committee, there were no accusations ever made against him. What is unusual to note is that though the selection committee had recommended the extension of the appellant and also his promotion, but such recommendation was not accepted by the Board of Governors apparently, as in the intervening period complaints made by the appellant had come to the knowledge of the respondent-NIPER resulting in nonacceptance of the recommendations of selection committee," it said further adding that his grievances were looked into by rapid grievance redressal committee but committee's recommendation were not followed. It in fact, disbanded, which showed "the utter hostility worn by the senior NIPER officers against the appellant and all sensible voices have been rudely crushed". It said that during the proceedings before the court repeated opportunities were given to look into his matter but have "fallen on deaf ears" and an "adamant approach still prevails" on the part of the NIPER. None of the charges levelled against him were even remotely proved, it added quashing the punishment order passed against Kumar....