KARANGIYA DEVANAND ALA Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Present Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant-original plaintiff posing the following substantial questions of law.

(2.) The short facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the appellant-original plaintiff filed Regular Civil Suit No. 5 of 1995 before the learned Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Porbandar. After considering the material and evidence, the Trial Court dismissed the suit vide judgment and order dated 19th July,2002. Thereafter, Regular Civil Appeal No.21 of 2002 came to be preferred against the judgment of the Trial Court before the learned Assistant Judge, Porbandar, which also came to be dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Porbandar vide judgment and order dated 30th November,2010 and, therefore, the present Second Appeal has been filed posing the aforesaid substantial questions of law.

(3.) As discussed in detail by both the Courts below, the plaintiff appeared for selection for the post of Primary Teacher and had submitted the mark-sheet with regard to passing the examination of PTC. The said mark-sheet was sent to the concerned authority for verification and the State Examination Board has found it to be fabricated and, therefore, the notice was issued. The case of the appellant-original plaintiff has also been discussed by the Lower Appellate Court and has very specifically stated that the appellant-original Plaintiff had passed the said examination in the year 1985, for which the mark-sheet has been produced at Exh.37 bearing No.2666. Another mark-sheet is also produced at Exh.52, wherein he is said to have passed in the year 1986. Therefore, the Lower Appellate Court has specifically observed that if he had passed the examination in the year 1986, then why did he attach the mark-sheet of 1985 of the second year examination which has been produced at Exh.37. This aspect has been considered by both the Courts below and both the Courts below have given the concurrent findings which has been assailed by posing aforesaid substantial questions of law.