KRISHNA GOPAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant i.e., fraud and justice never dwell together is a pristine maxim which has never lost its temper over all these centuries. The facts and circumstances which are relevant and germane to all these petitions in general and the eventual adjudication on the lis involved in the matter has direct proximity with, this maxim of great significance. The petitioners in all these petitions have assailed the impugned order dated 29th of August, 1996, whereby their services were terminated as Teacher Grade-III by the third respondent on the ground that Bachelor of Education degree obtained by petitioners, Krishna Gopal & Devi Lal, in the year 1992 and the petitioner, Dinesh Kumar Joshi, in the year 1991 is spurious.

(2.) Undisputed facts are that an advertisement was published in the month of September, 1995 bearing Advertisement No. 1/95 by the second respondent for making recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade-III under various panchayat samitis. As per the terms of the advertisement, total vacancies were notified as 225 with further bifurcation of the reserved vacancies. The case as set out in the writ petitions by all the petitioners is that all of them offered their candidatures for selection arid on being selected, appointment order was issued. Pursuant to appointment order, all of them joined their duties and started discharging their duties. It appears that there was some complaint about the degree of Bachelor of Education obtained by all the petitioners and categorizing the said degree as forged one, FIR was also registered with the Police Station Raipur, Bhilwara. Considering the fact that B.Ed. degrees of the petitioners were forged, their services were terminated by the impugned order. Assailing the order of termination, precisely the petitioners have urged in the writ petitions that although all of them are possessing a valid degree, their services have been terminated without assigning any cogent reason and making necessary, inquiry to unearth the truth about the allegation of the fake degrees. The petitioners have also asserted that the requisite B.Ed. degree was obtained by all of them from the Lucknow University and as such without making necessary inquiry in the matter, it cannot be categorized as forged. From the order impugned, it is clear that the petitioners were initially appointed on probation for two years and on revealing the fact about the forged degree, their services were brought to an end during probation period.

(3.) On behalf of the respondents, reply was submitted and it was averred in the reply that the petitioners have procured the appointment by producing forged degrees of B.Ed., and therefore, it was not possible for the respondents to retain them in services and as such there is no infirmity much less legal infirmity in the impugned termination order. The respondents have also stated in the reply that when the documents submitted by the petitioners were sent for verification a communication was received from University of Lucknow that mark-sheets of B.Ed., examination produced by the petitioners are forged. Castigating the petitioners for their dubious conduct of procuring the appointment on a forged document, it was pleaded in the reply that in such matters the principles of natural justice is not attracted and no relief can be granted to the petitioners. At the threshold, the matter came up before this Court on 2nd July, 2002 and the Court was pleased to pass following order:-