BHARTI UTTAMRAO CHAWARE Vs. SUBHASH SHIKSHAN SANSTHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Qazi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Marpakwar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Ms. Barabde, learned AGP for the respondent No.3/State.

(2.) The petition challenges the judgment of the learned School Tribunal, Amravati dtd. 20/8/2019, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging her termination by the order dtd. 20/6/2015 has been dismissed.

(3.) The relevant facts giving rise to the petition indicates, that in pursuance to the advertisement dtd. 24/11/2011 issued by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for filing a post of Full Time Teacher (Bakery and Confectionery), the petitioner had applied, interviews were conducted on 2/12/2011 and the petitioner was selected. In order to substantiate her plea, that the petitioner had an experience which was a requirement, she had submitted an experience certificate dtd. 12/4/2011 issued by Shri Kisanrao Kherde Vidyalay, Dhotarkheda (page 17). The appointment of the petitioner was on probation by the order dtd. 2/1/2012 to which an approval was granted by the respondent No.3 by the order dtd. 20/12/2012. On a complaint received by the respondent No.3, that the experience certificate dtd. 12/4/2011 submitted by the petitioner was a false certificate, the respondent No. 3 made enquiries with Shri Kisanrao Kherde Vidyalay, Dhotarkheda, whereupon he received a communication dtd. 6/5/2015, stating that for the Academic Sessions 2007-08 and 2008-09, the subject of Home Science was not taught in the School at all and is still not being taught. It further states, that upon verification of the record for the aforesaid Academic Sessions including the inward and outward register, the certificate bearing outward No. 340 dtd. 12/4/2011 which is claimed to have been granted to the petitioner was never issued by the School. It further states, that the records of the School do not indicate the employment of the petitioner nor making any payment of any salary to her. In sum and substance, the certificate indicated that the petitioner was never employed with Shri Kisanrao Kherde Vidyalay, Dhotarkheda and the experience certificate submitted (page 17) was a fake certificate. It is noting this position, that the respondent No. 3 recommended termination of the employment of the petitioner on the ground that the experience certificate which was a requirement for being employed having been found to be a fake certificate, the services of the petitioner could not be continued, which accordingly was done by the order dtd. 20/6/2015 challenge to which before the learned School Tribunal has failed.