RANJANA VAISHISHTHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition seeks the indulgence of this Court for grant of a writ of prohibition restraining respondent No. 4 from proceeding ahead and continuing the departmental proceedings against the petitioner, as was contemplated in terms of letter No. F. EO (I) 2000 -KVS (JR) 2950 dated: 25 -08 -2000. Vide this communication departmental proceedings were sought to be initiated against the petitioner in terms of Rule 14 Civil Services (Classification, Control And Appeals) Rules, 1965 (Central). The petitioner was also called upon to appear before the Inquiry Officer and also to nominee her defence Assistant, if she so wished. On issuance of aforesaid letter the petitioner approached this court with this petition on 10 -10 -2000. This court on 19 -10 -2000 admitted the petition to hearing and while disposing of CMP No. 2211/2000 restrained the respondents from pronouncing the final order. Obviously the final order arising out of the departmental proceedings has not so far been passed.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the petitioner was employed as a Laboratory Attendant in Kendriya Vidyalay Sangathan in the year 1984. An advertisement was floated by the Sangathan for filling up the posts of Primary Teachers in general category. The petitioner also applied for such appointment. Passing of B.Ed, was one of the preconditions for the appointment. The petitioner represented that she was eligible as she had passed B.Ed, examination. She produced a qualification certificate which, according to her, was issued by Gandhi Hindi Vidaya Pith Allahabad. The Selection Committee after going through her testimonials found her eligible for appointment, as teacher and appointed her. Assistant Commissioner K.V.S. Jammu region vide his order No. F (15 -1)/90 -KVS (JR) dated: 30 -01 -1992 also confirmed the services of the petitioner alongwith others. Subsequently, though after a lapse of some years, respondents came to find that the certificate relied upon by the petitioner was fake. They started a departmental inquiry and issued an order on 22 -06 -2000, by virtue of which appointment as a teacher was cancelled. The petitioner approached this court with SWP No. 1007/2000. A coordinate Bench of this court found that the order of appointment had been passed prior to the date fixed for filing objections to the show cause notice, therefore, the court vide its judgment dated: 03 -10 -2000 set aside the order dated: 22 -06 -2000 and left the respondents free to continue with the inquiry and pass appropriate orders, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It was in compliance of this order that fresh inquiry was sought to be initiated and respondent No. 2 was appointed as Inquiry Officer, who issued the impugned communication dated: 25 -08 -2000.

(3.) HOWEVER , after initiation of departmental proceedings on 17 -06 -2000 Central Bureau of Investigation of their own also registered a case under No. RC -9(S) 2000 -JMU under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 -Ranbir Penal Code, Svt. 1989 (1932 A.D.) against the petition. This was done on 15 -09 -2000.