Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Rabindranath Samanta, J.
Arnab Bandyopadhyay - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal And Others - Respondent
WPA No. 15031 of 2022
Decided On : 20-09-2022
Fraud - Employment Dismissal - Special Rules of 1973 - [LIBRARIAN EMPLOYMENT DISMISSAL] - [Special Rules of 1973] - [Rule 12 of the Special Rules, 1973 authorizes the management to dismiss or terminate any employee of the school. The petitioner's fraudulent submission of fake educational testimonials warranted his dismissal from service.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Librarian, challenged his dismissal from service by the school's Managing Committee. He claimed innocence regarding the fake certificate allegations and sought reinstatement and salary release.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner submitted fake educational testimonials and suppressed material facts, leading to his dismissal. The court dismissed the writ petition and imposed a cost of Rs.10,000 for the petitioner's fraudulent conduct.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's alleged submission of fake educational certificates, the authority of the school's Managing Committee to dismiss employees, and the applicability of the Special Rules of 1973.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's fraudulent conduct, including the submission of fake educational testimonials and suppression of material facts, warranted his dismissal. The court also determined that the school was governed by the Special Rules of 1973, which authorized the management to dismiss employees.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to deposit a cost of Rs.10,000. The court clarified that its decision had no persuasive effect on the criminal case against the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Rabindranath Samanta, J. - The petitioner by preferring this writ petition has challenged the order of dismissal from service served upon him by the respondent No.7, the Secretary, Managing Committee, Dayanand Vidyalaya, Asansol, Paschim Bardhaman. The petitioner states that he completed his B.SC (Honours) degree from the University of Burdwan in 1995. Thereafter, he completed his Bachelor of Library & Information Science (B.Lib. & I.Sc) from Mats University vide Roll No. 9111311500 and mark-sheet No. 001780/12-13 in June-July, 2013. Having requisite qualification to be appointed as Librarian, the petitioner applied for appointment to the post of the Librarian of Dayanand Vidyalaya to its Managing Committee. He participated in the selection process and being successful he was appointed as a Librarian in H.S. Section of the school on probation for a period of one year on a salary of Rs.7100/- as basic pay per month in the scale of PB-3, Rs.7100- 37600 + Grade pay Rs.3900/- plus allowances as admissible under the Government Rules subject to the terms and condition laid down in the school code applicable to aided schools. The Additional District Inspector of Schools (S.E) approved the appointment of the petitioner and passed order of retention.
2. Since the appointment the petitioner rendered service as Librarian with sincerity and honesty. It may be noted that the Additional District Inspector of Schools (S.E), Asansol, District -Burdwan vide Memo dated 26.09.2016 sanctioned additional post of Librarian in favour of the said school in terms of Memo dated 03.10.2007 and Government Order dated 08.06.2007 and this post was retained until further order considering the roll strength of the school. The appointment of the petitioner as Librarian was confirmed after completion of two years of continuous service considering the satisfactory service rendered by him.
3. The present Managing Committee of the school after taking charge raised a number of vague allegations against the petitioner with an ulterior motive to remove him from the post of Librarian. With such ulterior motive, the Secretary of the school issued a show cause notice dated 12.09.2019 to him asking him as to why legal action would not be initiated against him as per the verification report of Global Open University, Nagaland vide their letters dated 23.10.2018 and 04.02.2019 whereby his certificate of B.A in Library and Information Science was found to be fake. The petitioner by a letter dated 21.09.2019 sought for time to respond to the show cause notice.
Allowing his request the Secretary by an another Memo dated 01.10.2019 asked reply of the petitioner on the verification report furnished by Global Open University, Nagaland. By a letter dated 18.10.2019 he again sought for time on the ground that he was out of station for treatment of his father-in-law.
4. Without responding to his letter dated 18.10.2019, the Secretary of the school, all of a sudden, served the order of dismissal upon him vide Memo dated 22.10.2019.
5. The petitioner challenges the verification report of the Global Open University, Nagaland on the premise that the verification report relates to two Roll Nos. i) TGOU/BA/7890/B.LIB.I.SC/2012F and ii) TGOU/BA/7890/B.LIB.I.SC/2008G.
6. The petitioner contends that after the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (Appointment, Confirmation, Conduct and Discipline of Teachers and Non-Teaching staff) Rules, 2018 came into force vide notification dated 8th March, 2018, the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education is now the appropriate authority to start disciplinary proceeding against a teacher and non-teaching staff and dismiss him from service. The Managing Committee of the said school is not authorised either to initiate disciplinary proceedings or to inflict order of dismissal upon the petitioner.
7. The petitioner states that he never pursued his course from the Global Open University. He pursued his course from the Mats University, Raipur. He nev
Fraudulent conduct, including the submission of fake educational testimonials and suppression of material facts, can warrant dismissal from employment.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the validity and applicability of the 1973 Rules in governing the recruitment process for a minority educational institution, despite the refusa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of the petitioner as a librarian was lawful and in accordance with the relevant government orders and recruitment rules.
The court established the validity of the Special Rules in relation to the Management Rules, 1969 and determined that the Special Rules had not been rescinded and were still in operation.
An appointment secured through fraudulent documents is void ab initio, and no formal inquiry is required for cancellation; fraud vitiates all actions taken under such circumstances.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of a fair and transparent inquiry process, ensuring the right to cross-examine witnesses and present a defense, as mandated by Rule 9 of the Nagaland Services (....
Termination of service without inquiry and prior approval violates statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.
Dismissal without prior approval of DOE under Section 8(2) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 is not sustainable.
The dismissal of an employee for unauthorized absence is justified when procedural requirements are met, despite claims of improper procedure by the employee.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
