RAJPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Petitioner's services were terminated in the year 1996 and he preferred to challenge the said order by preferring appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal which was dismissed on 10.11.1998 holding that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in the matter of termination of service of employee. That order of the Tribunal was never challenged and the order dated 10.11.1998 attained the finality. The petitioner also preferred one writ petition before this Court which was decided vide order dated 06.07.2006. It appears from the Judgment dated 06.07.2006 that petitioner sought relief of release of annual grade increment however, when petitioner was asked to explain when his services have been terminated and he has preferred appeal then how he can get relief of annual grade increment. The writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed for relief of annual grade increment under the above order dated 06.07.2006. The petitioner also faced criminal case for submitting forged degree and he was acquitted by the Judgment dated 03.03.2000 by the trial Court against which appeal is pending before this Court.

(3.) Learned Counsel vehemently submitted that petitioner's services were dispensed with on the basis of the letter received by the respondent dated 10.11.1995 from the office of the Kanpur University and on the basis of that letter, it was held that the mark-sheets submitted by the petitioner were forged, however, when petitioner inquired through his Advocate by sending notice/letter dated 26.11.1995, then the Vice Chancellor of the University by communication dated 11.12.1995 addressed to the counsel for the petitioner, informed that the mark-sheets which were declared forged earlier vide letter dated 10.11.1995 was issued wrongly. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after letter dated 11.12.1995, there was no reason for respondent to keep petitioner out of job as the very foundation for dispensing with the service of the petitioner fall on the ground. The petitioner also submitted representations for his reinstatement in the year 2000, copies of which have been placed on record by the petitioner.