HARI SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS intra -Court appeal is laid by the appellant/petitioner imploring annulment of judgment & order dated 25th of July 2013 passed by the writ Court dismissing his writ petition.

(2.) APPOSITE facts for unearthing the lis involved in the matter are that in the year 1997 an advertisement was issued by the third respondent for making direct recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade -III and pursuant thereto appellant offered his candidature for selection by way of submitting his application form with requisite testimonials to show his eligibility. As per the version of the appellant, demonstrated from the writ petition, in his application form he has mentioned the total marks secured in BSTC practical and written examination but the marks obtained by him in BSTC practical examination were deleted by someone substituting higher percentage of marks in the application form i.e. 88.50%. In order to substantiate this positive assertion, the appellant has pleaded in the writ petition that he has disclosed his total marks secured in practical examination as 374 out of 700 marks. The application submitted by the appellant was scrutinized and considering his merit position on the basis of marks obtained by him in BSTC examination, he was offered appointment as Teacher Grade -III vide order dated 27th of September 1997. While serving the respondents in the capacity of Teacher Grade -III, a complaint was lodged against the appellant by one Shri Rajeev Punia in the year 2005 alleging therein that the appellant has practiced fraud for obtaining the employment by mentioning incorrect description of the marks obtained by him in BSTC practical examination. The complainant with these allegations made a request for probing the matter. On receipt of the complaint, the third respondent issued a notice to the appellant on 28th of May 2005 calling upon him to submit his original certificates for scrutiny. When the said notice was not responded, yet another notice was issued on 28th of April 2006 and pursuant thereto the appellant submitted his original certificate. Subsequent to that, a notice was issued to the appellant stating therein that he has entered the government service as Teacher Grade -III by committing fraud/collusion soliciting his reply/ explanation. In the notice, it was mentioned that the appellant has shown the marks obtained by him in practical examination of BSTC as 631 out of 700 instead of actual marks secured i.e. 374. Clarifying that if the actual marks secured by the appellant in BSTC examination are to be considered for adjudicating his merit position then he falls below par the last merit of the candidate appointed in General Category (Male). Responding to the said notice, the appellant submitted his reply/explanation. In his explanation the appellant has averred that neither he has committed any fraud, nor he has interpolated the certificate produced at the time of interview. While attributing role of someone else in alteration of his marks in the application, the appellant pleaded ignorance about the same. After considering the reply of the appellant, a further opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to him by sending a communication dated 16th of September 2006 while simultaneously making him available a copy of the application form. Subsequent thereto, the matter was enquired into and the allegation against the appellant was found proved. Considering the enquiry report, the services of the appellant were dispensed with by order dated 28th of December 2006. Assailing the order of termination, the appellant averred in the writ petition that the same is bad in law as no enquiry as contemplated under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 was conducted against him. The appellant has also assailed the order dated 28th of December 2006 by categorizing the same as illegal and arbitrary in clear negation of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant Mr. R.S. Choudhary has argued that the appellant has not played any role in the alleged interpolation of his marks in the application form and for that purpose he has precisely placed reliance on a factual report/enquiry report prepared by the Addl. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Churu. Mr. Choudhary would contend that from the factual report/enquiry, it is crystal clear that the appellant has neither produced any forged marksheet, nor he has manipulated the marks obtained in BSTC Examination and therefore the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge cannot be sustained. Mr. Choudhary has further submitted that the appellant has served for almost ten years and therefore when no fault is attributable to him for the alleged manipulation/interpolation in the application form, the impugned action is not at all desirable and by applying the basic tenets of equity in his favour, the impugned judgment as well as impugned action of the respondents are liable to be annulled.