SARTAJ SINGH SAJWAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a grant-in-aid private school known as "Inter College, Kotalgaon, Patti Bhadura" a post of Assistant Clerk fell vacant and consequently an advertisement was issued for the selection and appointment of a suitable person to the said post. The advertisement was issued by the Management Committee on 24.08.2014 in which 38 candidates applied out of which 26 candidates were found eligible and were called for interview on 22.11.2014 in which finally 17 candidates appeared. The petitioner - Dinesh Singh Pokhriyal (in WPSS No. 175 of 2015) and respondent No. 6 - Manmodh Singh (in WPSS No. 332 of 2015) were the candidates to the said post. After selection process, respondent No. 6 (in WPSS No. 332 of 2015) was selected, as he obtained the highest marks and was recommended for appointment by the selection committee. The appointment of respondent No. 6 (in WPSS No. 332 of 2015) has been challenged by the petitioner, who is the Principal of Inter College, Kotalgaon, Patti Bhadura, Tehsil Pratap Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal as well as petitioner - Dinesh Singh Pokhariyal (in WPSS No. 175 of 2015), who was a candidate for the said post. For the facts, we have referred here pertains to WPSS No. 332 of 2015. It is again an admitted fact that petitioner in WPSS No. 332 of 2015 is the father-in-law of petitioner-Dinesh Singh Pokhriyal in WPSS No. 175 of 2015, who has not been selected in the said process. The reasons as to why the petitioner-Sartaj Singh Sajwan (the son-in-law) has challenged the appointment and selection of respondent No. 6 - Manmodh Singh is that the selected candidate - Manmodh Singh had allegedly submitted a false certificate relating to his experience and on enquiry subsequently it has been found that his certificate is not genuine, and therefore, it is submitted here that his appointed could not have been made.

(2.) Another additional plea which has been taken by the petitioner-Sartaj Singh Sajwan is that the entire selection process was wrong and he had made a complaint to the Chief Education Officer in this regard, who had passed an order saying that regarding the selection process a complaint has been made on which presently an enquiry is being made, and therefore, the selection and appointment of any person on the said post cannot be approved. The reasons why Chief Education Officer has said so is that meanwhile, the Management Committee had approved the selection of respondent No. 6 and had given him an appointment subject to the approval of the Chief Education Officer. Consequently, the Chief Education Officer rejected the approval citing reasons such as its alleged anomaly in the selection and also the fact that presently an enquiry is going on in the matter.

(3.) The respondent No. 6 has filed its counter affidavit and the counter affidavit has also been filed by the State Government as well.