As per case facts, Dr. Neeraj Kumar, an Assistant Professor at NIPER, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and ultimately compulsory retirement following his objections to the constitution of a Selection ... Committee and other complaints against the management, which led to a CBI probe. Despite a Selection Committee recommending his promotion and a Grievance Redressal Committee finding the charges weak, NIPER proceeded with punishment based on complaints, primarily from a HOD against whom the appellant had complained. His initial writ petition challenging the compulsory retirement was dismissed by a Single Judge. The question arose whether the charges, inquiry report, and the resulting punishment of compulsory retirement were legally sustainable and free from malice, especially considering the complainant student had exonerated him and other charges lacked evidence. Finally, the High Court concluded that none of the charges were remotely proved, the punishment was unsustainable due to malice in law and gross injustice, ordered his immediate reinstatement as Assistant Professor with continuous service, and imposed costs of Rs. 10 Lacs on NIPER.