MAN MOHAN SINGH NEGI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following relief : (A) Issue a suitable writ, order or di rection in the nature of certiorari call for the record of the case and quash the impugned order dated 05-1-1994 (annexure-1 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 3, communicat ing the order of the respondent No. 2 a copy was not served on the petitioner. (B) Issue a suitable writ, order or di rection in the nature of mandamus commanding the re spondents to treat and continue to treat the petitioner in continu ous service as a Technical Assist ant as if no impugned order of termination/removal against the petitioner was ever passed. Fur ther the respondents may be re instated to interfere with the serving and working of the peti tioner as a Technical Assistant in any manner whatsoever. (C) Issue any suitable writ, order or direction to which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the writ petition are that in pursuance of the post of Techni cal Assistant advertised by the respond ent No. 3 in 'indian Express' newspaper the petitioner applied for the same and as per requirement filed the documents, such as, registration certificate of the Employment Exchange, experience cer tificate, High School and Intermediate examination passed mark sheets and certificates and the provisional certifi cate showing that he passed final year diploma in Mechanical Engineering three years course from Nainital Polytechnic. Thereafter petitioner received a letter dated 21-02-1989 to appear before the Interview Committee for interview. He appeared before the said committee. Later on, the respondent No. 2 on the recommendation of Selection Commit tee offered appointment to the petitioner as Technical Assistant under Rule 44 (XII) of Rules and Regulations of the re spondent No. 2. Ultimately, appointment letter was issued to the petitioner on 13-03-1989 by respondent No. 3 directing him to report himself on duty latest on or before 20-03-1989. In pursuance of the appointment letter, the petitioner took over charge on the post of the Tech nical Assistant and since then he served and worked with the respondent No. 3 till the date of the impugned order which is under challenge. On 05- 01-1994 the re spondent No. 1 communicated the peti tioner that his services have been termi nated by the Chairman Executive Com mittee, Electronics Services and Train ing Centre Kaniya, Ram Nagar, District-Nainital on the ground that the peti tioner for getting job submitted a forged experience certificate and as such he be not paid any service emoluments from 06-01-1994. He was also required to show cause within 15 days why the serv ice emoluments paid to him be not re alized from him in view of forged expe rience certificate submitted by him. The petitioner submitted his reply on 13-01-1994.

(3.) THE petitioner in his rejoinder af fidavit denied the assertion of the re spondents and stated that he has two years' service in Kelvinator and thereaf ter he accepted service in Public Works Department from January 1982 to April 1982. He alleged that the Annexure No. 5 and Annexure No. 5-A to the coun ter affidavit do not relate to the petitioner and a bare reading of both it can be seen that they relate to some Manmohan Singh son of Narendra Singh. THE peti tioner reiterated that the certificate ob tained by the petitioner is bonafide and not fictitious as alleged by the respondents.