NAWAB SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, a challenge is made to the judgment dtd. 9/12/2020, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant-petitioner was dismissed.

(2.) It is a case where service of the appellant was terminated by respondent vide order dtd. 22/9/2020. It was on the ground that B.Ed, degree was obtained from Kesarwani Vidyapith, Jabalpur (M.P.). The University Grant Commission issued Press Release for fake Universities/Institutions in which name of Kesarwani Vidyapith, Jabalpur (M.P.) also appeared. Since the institution was not having authority to confer degree, if obtained by the appellant, would be void and it is settled law that the void appointment cannot be considered for grant of any benefit whatsoever and even in reference to delay, the Apex Court in the case of R. Vishwanatha Pillai vs. State of Kerala and Ors., 2004(2) SCC 105 held that even delay in initiation of action or for that even rendering 27 years of service would not be a ground for grant of relief. The relevant para of the aforesaid judgment is quoted here under for ready reference:

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Joint Collector Ranga Reddy District and another vs. D. Narsing Rao and others, (2015) 3 SCC 695. It is in reference to delay in initiation of action. The issue before the Apex Court in the case was different. It was a revenue case where period of limitation is also provided. The facts of this case are absolutely different and otherwise covered by the judgment in the case of R.Vishwanatha Pillai (supra).