(1.) Petitioner is aggrieved by the communication dated 15.4.2003 of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Darbhanga addressed to the Incharge Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Hayaghat informing that the service of the petitioner as Auxilary Nurse Midwife at Primary Health Centre, Hayaghat is terminated with immediate effect. Petitioner is further aggrieved by order dated 21.4.2003 (Annexure-7) whereby the Incharge Medical Officer of the Primary Health Centre informed her about the termination of her appointment. Prayer of this petitioner in this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to quash the aforesaid communication and the order.
(2.) According to the petitioner, in pursuance of the advertisement for filling up the post of Auxilary Nurse Midwife, hereinafter referred to as the Midwife, she offered her candidature claiming to have passed the Secondary School Examination held by the Bihar School Examination Board in the year 1988. According to the petitioner, her candidature was considered and she was asked to appear before the Selection Board on 26th of June, 1989 and after she had undergone the selection process, by letter dated 16.6.1989 she was chosen for training as Midwife. While conveying to the petitioner about her selection she was asked to report along with original certificates which according to the petitioner she gave, on several occasions and after the verification same were returned to her. After the selection petitioner was allowed to complete two years training which she completed in the year 1992.
(3.) After the petitioner had undergone the training successfully, by letter dated 29th of May, 1995 (Annexure-2) she was appointed as Midwife in the scale of pay of Rs. 1200 to 1800/- and posted at Primary Health Centre, Pokhrarna. In pursuance of the aforesaid letter of appointment, petitioner joined as Midwife. However, later on by letter dated 30th of March, 1996 (Annexure-3) she was asked to produce her letter of appointment, Midwife training certificate, certificate relating to educational qualification and the mark-sheet. According to the petitioner, she submitted the required certificate and the mark-sheet and after verification the same was retuned but all of a sudden by letter dated 3.5.2002 (Annexure-5) the petitioner was informed that the discrepancies have been found in the mark-sheet submitted by her at the time when she offered her candidature to undergo training as Midwife and the mark-sheet given by her during the course of enquiry. Accordingly the Civil Surgeon, being 'prima facie satisfied, that petitioner had obtained the training of Midwife by producing fabricated mark-sheet, she was asked to show cause as to why her services be not terminated. Petitioner submitted her reply (Annexure-6) and in that she asserted that according to her knowledge no interpolation has been made in the record. The plea put forward by the petitioner was considered and ultimately it was found that petitioner got herself selected for training as Midwife on the basis of the forged mark-sheet and accordingly her appointment was terminated.