VINOD KUMAR SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Amit Bose, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri R.K. Kidwai holding brief of Sri Sunil Sharma learned counsel for the opposite parties.

(2.) In brief, the facts as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Geologist (Junior) in the Geological Survey of India after selection by the Union Public Service Commission on 24.4.1981. On 5.11.1996, at police station Kotwali, District Haridwar a first information report was lodged by the Registrar, Roorkee University, Roorkee inter alia stating therein that on 19.7.1995 petitioner had applied for admission to the Ph.D. Course in the Roorkeee University, along with said application the petitioner had enclosed copy of his M.Sc. Final year mark-sheet indicating therein that the petitioner had obtained 1969 marks with 65% marks in the said course. However, on comparison of the said mark-sheet with the tabulation sheet available with the Roorkee University, it was found that the petitioner had in fact obtained 1869 marks with a percentage of 62.3% marks in the M.Sc. Final year examination as as such the petitioner had a forged mark-sheet. On the basis of aforesaid first information report a case crime No. 285/1996 under Sections 420,467,468,471, IPC was registered against the petitioner at police station Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar and in the said matter final report was submitted on 27.7.1997 which was subsequently accepted by an order dated 7.3.1998 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar.

(3.) It was further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a meeting of the departmental promotion committee was convened on 16.12.1997 to consider the officers serving on the post of Geologist (Junior) for promotion to the post of Geologist (Senior) in the Geological Survey of India. The case of the petitioner was also considered but recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee in respect to the petitioner's case was kept in a sealed cover on the ground that the investigation in the aforesaid crime was pending against him.