Two years after his services were terminated and orders were issued for salary recovery following charges of casteist harassment, misrepresentation in his CV, and imposing a financial burden on the institute, the former principal of the State Institute of Hotel Management, Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition, New Tehri, Yashpal Singh Negi, has been reinstated by the Uttarakhand government, The Indian Express has learnt.
In an order issued on May 28, 2024, the then Tourism Secretary, under whose jurisdiction the institute functions, had ordered his termination, stating that while serving as Director/Principal (contractual), Negi had failed to discharge his official duties and responsibilities with due diligence.
However, in a correspondence dated April 10, 2026, the Tourism Secretary ordered his reinstatement. The correspondence notes that Negi would withdraw the petition through which he had taken the government to court. The former principal had challenged the termination order at the high court, which stayed the order. The department appealed to the Supreme Court, after which the HC stay was set aside, but the recovery was stayed until the hearing was completed. The reinstatement has now been initiated after Negi wrote to the government requesting that he be taken back, stating that he would withdraw the petition in accordance with due legal process.
In fact, on January 2, 2026, the meeting of the Board of Governors of the institute under the chairmanship of the tourism secretary had decided that the selection of the principal will be through a regular appointment. The minutes of the meeting show that the board had decided to issue a fresh advertisement for the post.
While Negi declined to comment on the matter, the UTDB officials did not respond to queries seeking comment.
The allegations
Negi became director in 2016 after serving as an associate professor.
The 2024 termination order lists a series of charges against Negi following a departmental inquiry on May 6, 2024. The committee report said that Negi harassed subordinate academic and non-academic staff; falsely claimed in his biodata to possess a PhD for the post of Associate Professor; provided false information in his biodata for the post of Director/Principal, claiming to have supervised/co-supervised at least two completed PhD candidates; imposed an unnecessary financial burden on the institute by issuing newspaper advertisements for the appraisal system implemented in the institute; did not regularly mark biometric attendance daily and, in cases of absence, later signed the manual attendance register for multiple days at once; was held responsible by the Scheduled Castes Commission for harassing Anil Kumar Tamta, an Assistant Professor; transferred Rs 49,800 to the personal bank account of an Assistant Professor, which the report said was in violation of rules. The committee report also said that the institutional environment was found to have deteriorated.
“Based on statements of subordinate staff, he was found to use abusive language towards them and was also responsible for delays in payment of staff salaries. Additionally, several complaints had been received from time to time through the district administration/police administration, resulting in damage to the institution’s reputation,” the order that includes the findings said. A communication was sent to the District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal, for the recovery of the salary and other payments made to him from the date of his appointment in the institution.
Story continues below this ad
After he was terminated, Negi filed a petition at the Uttarakhand High Court in June 2024, challenging the order. He had submitted that neither any show cause notice nor any charge-sheet was given to him before terminating his services, and “a stigmatic order has been passed in which serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner”. The counsel for Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board submitted that an enquiry committee was constituted, and after hearing the version of the petitioner, a report was filed, based on which his services were terminated. However, the court stayed the department’s order on June 19, 2024, stating the government could not satisfactorily respond if a chargesheet was issued before termination.
Soon after, the tourism development board moved the Supreme Court, challenging the HC order. While the order for salary recovery was stayed by the SC, it set aside the HC stay order and directed the parties to complete the pleadings before the High Court within four weeks. “It is clarified that the recovery sought against the respondent shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition,” the order dated July 22, 2024.
While the matter is pending, the department has issued another order, reinstating Negi’s services. The order, issued by tourism secretary Dhiraj Garbyal, said that Negi has submitted an application dated March 5, 2026 and a letter dated April 7, 2026, requesting that if the government of Uttarakhand reinstates him to his previous post under the same service conditions, he will withdraw the petition and all related proceedings before the High Court, in accordance with due legal process. “Therefore, after due consideration at the government level, it has been decided to cancel, with immediate effect, [the 2024 order and letter]. Accordingly, the services of Negi are hereby reinstated… under the same service conditions,” the order stated. The order also granted Negi a month to assume charge at his place of posting. “Within this period, he shall also submit documents regarding withdrawal of the writ petition filed before the Hon’ble High Court,” the order said.
The allegation that he had harassed a professor at the institute was taken up by the Scheduled Castes Commission in July 2023. Tamta had alleged that the Principal would call him to his office and behave abusively, using casteist remarks and humiliating him, causing mental pressure and depression requiring medical assistance, and that despite being a Professor of Food Production, he was prevented from teaching his subject on the pretext of untouchability. The commission held that constitutional rights were violated and ordered that, if the harassment continued, a criminal complaint under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) would be filed.
