SHASHI KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ application has been filed for quashing the order of concurrence passed by the Secretary, Bihar College Service Commission, Patna, whereby the concurrence has been granted to the appointment of Respondent No.9 as the Principal, Shershah College, Sasaram, The aforesaid order is contained in Annexure -1. A bare perusal of the aforesaid order would go to show that the same has been done in view of some order of this Court as well as the Supreme Court of India.

(2.) A further prayer has also been made for quashing of Annexure -2 which is the original letter of the College Service Commission granting concurrence to the appointment of one Dharamraj Singh as Principal of Shershah College, Sasaram.

(3.) ANNEXURE -5, which is the report of the committee constituted by the University has also been relied upon and placed in Court to show that Respondent No.9 had used fraudulent document to show his teaching experience and also that the teaching experience which has been considered was for a period when the college was not affiliated at the degree level in Science faculty. The report of the District Magistrate, Rohtas which forms part of Annexure -5 goes to show that the Shanker College where the Respondent No.9 claims to have been teaching experience for two years in the aforesaid college, there was no affiliation in the Science faculty and as such, no such appointment was made in Science teaching. Records of the college went to show that no such appointment was made on. Acting Principal of the aforesaid college, Dr. Shiv Narayan Singh has given a certificate to the effect that Dharamraj Singh was never appointed as Lecturer in the aforesaid college neither he ever joined the said college nor he was in service of the college. The aforesaid report also went to show that the Shershah College also affiliated in Science faculty till the Intermediate level from 1978 -79 and the post of teacher in the Physics department was approved from 26.3.1980. Another fact which is clear from the said report is that for appointment as a Principal one must have at least ten years of teaching experience which admittedly the Respondent No.9 did not possess. As such, the committee had recommended that let Respondent No.9 be transferred to some other college so that academic atmosphere can be re -established in the college in question. Another report of the committee appointed by the Vice -Chancellor of the Veer Kunwar Singh University, Arrah is at Annexure -5/A dated 20.3.1996. The Committee recommended that as concurrence/approval has already been granted by the college service commission, as such, the college service commission be requested to reconsider the same and for which purpose the State Government and the Chancellor can also be moved. In addition to these two enquiry reports as discussed above, another enquiry committee had been set up by the Vice Chancellor in view of direction of this Court earlier. The said report which is at Annexures -7 and 8 would go to show that Dharamraj Singh was never appointed in Shanker College, Sasaram nor ever worked in the said college. The certificate used by him has been found to be fake. The aforesaid report had been submitted after providing an opportunity of hearing to Respondent No.9. It has further been contended by learned counsel that by Annexure -1 the order of stay of Annexure -2 has been withdrawn giving reference to the cases of High Court and the Supreme Court but according to learned counsel, in addition to the matters as has been given in the writ application neither the petitioner nor the Respondent no.9 had moved this Court in any other application nor was there any order of the Supreme Court so far it related to the appointment/continuation of Respondent No.9 as the Principal of Shershah College, Sasaram.