BIDHI CHAND Vs. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by petitioner Bidhi Chand for quashing order dated 4.7.2000 (Annexure P -6/A) whereby he has been removed from service of the Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam respondent No.1 (hereinafter to be referred as the Nigam). Besides, for quashing letter dated 21.10.1997 issued on 9.12.1997 (Annexure P -8) whereby it has been informed to various authorities that Prathama/Madhyama of Hindi Sahitiya Sammelan, Allahabad, is not recognised equivalent to matriculation in Haryana and it is equivalent to matriculation in Hindi only. The petitioner has also sought a direction to allow him to continue in the service of the respondent Nigam.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Meter Reader in the Nigam vide appointment letter dated 30.9.1993 (Annexure P -1). He passed Prathama examination from the Hindi Sahitiya Sammelan, Prayaag, before joining the service. The petitioner has appended the certificate and the mark sheet issued by Hindi Sahitiya Sammelan, Prayaag as An -nexures P -2 and P -3 respectively. During his service the official respondents issued a show cause notice dated 12.11.1999 (Annexure P -4) to the effect that the qualification possessed by him is not equivalent to matriculation. The said show cause notice indicates that a complaint had been received against the petitioner in which it was alleged that he was not matriculate and did not possess the requisite qualification for the post of a Meter Reader. It is on the receipt of this complaint that the certificate which was submitted by the petitioner at the time of first entry into service was collected and it was observed that the same related to Hindi Sahitiya Sammelan Prayaag. This certificate was sent to the Secretary (Recruitment Cell) of the Nigam and he intimated that the qualification acquired by the petitioner was not equivalent to Matric standard of Haryana Education in view of Director Secondary Education (Haryana) Chandigarh, memo dated 9.12.1997 (Annexure P -8). The petitioner submitted his detailed reply to the show cause notice. A copy of the same has been placed on record as Annexure P -5. The petitioner in his reply to the show cause notice also relied upon a Judgment of this Court in the case of Krishan Kumar Rao v. Haryana Warehousing Corporation 1996 (1) R.S.J. 563.

(3.) IN response to notice issued to the respondents, official respondents No.1 to 3 have filed their written statement. The material fact is admitted that the petitioner was appointed as Meter Reader. However, it is highlighted that he was appointed on the understanding that he actually possesses the qualification of matriculation or its equivalent examination from Haryana Education Board or any other Education Board or University recognized by the State Government of Haryana. Besides he must have passed Hindi upto Matric standard. The issuance of certificate and marksheet Annexures P -2 and P -3 by the Hindi Sahitiya Sammelan, Prayaag has not been denied. It is also submitted that the show -cause notice Annexure P -4 was issued on receipt of a complaint which was followed by a notice served by the learned counsel for the complainant Om Parkash son of Radhe Ram.