NIYAZ AHMAD ANSARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order of dismissal of the petitioner dated 14.07.2006.

(2.) In brief the facts giving rise to the present petition are that in the year 1998 entrance examination of BTC training was held in which the petitioner appeared and selected. On 14.08.2000 call letter was issued to the petitioner and thereby he was required to appear with documents in original by 15.08.2000. The petitioner completed all the formalities required for taking admission in BTC training and after completing BTC training the petitioner has acquired legal right to be admitted in the institution, but he was shocked when his name was not called for attendance in the class. The petitioner moved representation against the said action of the respondents. His representation was not decided, therefore, he filed writ petition no. 6688 (S/S) of 2000 wherein by interim order dated 21.11.2000 this Court directed the opposite parties to permit the petitioner to continue his BTC training till the next date of listing and the same shall be subject to the further orders of this Court.

(3.) The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher Primary School, Mozariha, Block Sheopur, Bahraich and for certain allegations he was placed under suspension and thereafter dismissed from service on the ground that the certificate of teacher's ward and caste certificate filed by the petitioner were forged and fabricated. The suspension order was challenged by him in writ petition no. 1368 (S/S) of 2006 which was disposed of with the direction to the opposite parties to compete the inquiry within a period of two months. Since the inquiry was not completed within the aforesaid period, the contempt petition was filed by the petitioner. The allegation of the petitioner is that feeling aggrieved by the notice of the said contempt proceedings the petitioner was dismissed from service without holding any inquiry vide impugned order 14.07.2006. A perusal of the impugned order shows that on the basis of the Teacher's ward certificate additional 10-marks were awarded to the petitioner on the basis of which his name appeared in the select list. The caste certificate filed by the petitioner was also found to be fabricated. Charges were framed against the petitioner and notice was issued to him. It is submitted that he had not admitted the charges and only on the basis of the explanation submitted by him he was held to be guilty and his services were terminated.