NAVDEEP Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Challenge in this Appeal is to the legality of judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant who had questioned her termination of services by the respondents 1 to 4 i.e. State of Punjab and its functionaries. The order of termination was passed on the ground that she has tampered with her mark sheet to get employment. Enquiry was conducted and it was found that she had tampered with the mark sheet.

(3.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows : After passing the matriculation examination, appellant joined R.R. Bawa, DAV College for Girls, Batala, Punjab under the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, (in short the University) respondent No. 5. In June, 1995 she passed the B. Sc. (Economics), Part III examination securing 418 marks out of 800 marks. On the basis of the mark list submitted, she was admitted to the B.Ed. course under the University and passed the B.Ed. examination also. She was selected as JBT teacher in a Government aided School i.e. Ved Kaur Arya Girls High School, Quadian, Gurdaspur for teaching mathematics. While working as a teacher she completed her M.A. (Economics) examination by correspondence course from Punjab University, Patiala. While she was working as JBT teacher a news item was published indicating that 55 teachers obtained fake degrees and their services were terminated. Name of appellant was one of them. The orders of termination were passed on the basis of the orders passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a Public Interest Litigation. Appellant came to know that the allegations so far as she is concerned related to alleged tampering of marks in B.Sc. Part III, that is she had actually secured 86 marks in Economics and not 124, and in Computer Application she had secured 140 marks and not 102 as was shown in the mark sheet produced by her. On verification of the records from the University, it was clear that while her total marks remained same, there was increase in the marks of Computer Application while there was a decrease in marks of Economics. A writ petition was filed challenging the termination of her services. The High Court issued the notices to the respondents and the University. An enquiry was conducted by the University and the Enquiry Officer submitted a report which clearly indicated that there was reduction of marks in one subject and increase in the other. Stand of the appellant was that she has not got any benefit out of the alleged tampering and she was not responsible for the same. But her claim was not accepted. Though the Enquiry Officer found that she had not obtained any advantage out of it, yet the Enquiry Report was to the effect that the obvious purpose for tampering was to obtain a certain percentage of marks required for being eligible for admission. After verifying the documents in question, it was concluded that she had tampered with the mark sheet. It was concluded that there was only one purpose with which the tampering was done i.e. to take advantage in various admissions and selections in a government job as a teacher. The High Court accepted the report and dismissed the writ petition.