DHURAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner approached this Court seeking following relief:-

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as daily wage employee in the Forest Department in the year 1995 and he continued as such till his selection for regular appointment on the post of Forest Guard. Respondent No.3-Divisional Forest Officer, Uttarkashi issued an advertisement for filling up the vacancies of Forest Guard in the pay scale of Rs.5200- 20600 (Grade Pay 1800) in the year 2008. As per the advertisement, a casual labourer, who was engaged on or before 09.04.1996 and continuously working till that date in the department and has minimum educational qualification of High School, was eligible for the post of Forest Guard. The upper age limit for the casual labourers of the department was prescribed as 35 years plus the period for which they have continuously worked in the Department. In pursuance to that advertisement, petitioner applied for the post of Forest Guard. After being declared successful in the Physical/Medical Fitness Test, the petitioner along with other successful candidates appeared in the written test. According to the petitioner, he performed well in the written examination. On the basis of his performance in the physical test and written examination, the petitioner was declared successful. Respondent no.3 issued appointment order dated 22.01.2009, whereby the petitioner was appointed on the post of Forest Guard in the Forest Division, Uttarkashi. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner served in the department with utmost sincerity and no show cause notice or warning was issued to him. The service of the petitioner was confirmed on the post of Forest Guard vide order dated 20.06.2013. Further, it is the case of the petitioner that at the time of recruitment on the post of Forest Guard, the petitioner had submitted a certificate of Adhikari Pariksha from Gurukul University Vrindavan (Mathura) which he passed in the year 2005. The department, after scrutinizing the certificate submitted by the petitioner, issued call letter to the petitioner to appear in the examination, and after facing the selection, the petitioner was regularly appointed on the post of Forest Guard.

(3.) According to the petitioner, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the respondent no.3. In the notice, reliance was placed on the judgment rendered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 392 of 2013 Bharat Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. Petitioner was informed that petitioner is not educationally qualified for appointment on the post of Forest Guard. By the said notice, the petitioner was asked to give his explanation within one week i.e. up to 23.08.2013, as to why his services be not terminated for not having minimum qualification for the post of Forest Guard. The said notice was served on the petitioner on 25.08.2013. The petitioner submitted his reply on 07.09.2013, which was served in the Office of respondent no.3 same day. In his reply, the petitioner referred the letter issued by the Secretary, Uttarakhand Board of School Education on 16.05.2012, whereby respondent no.3 was informed that the learned Single Judge of this Court rendered a judgment on 03.12.2007 in Writ Petition No.1945 (M/S) of 2007 Vimal Gyan Jyoti, Higher Secondary School Rudrapur vs. State of Uttarakhand holding that till the date of de-recognition of Adhikari Pariksha i.e. 27.08.2007 by the State Government of Uttarakhand, the said qualification shall be treated as valid. According to the petitioner, the Government of Uttarakhand had issued a Government Order on 27.08.2007, whereby Adhikari Pariksha has been derecognized.