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 (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. C. T. Jamir, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Aliba Ozukum, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Angami, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondents.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner praying for setting aside and quashing the Inquiry report dated 07.04.2022 as well as removal order dated 08.06.2022 whereby the petitioner was removed from service under the Department of School Education, Nagaland without disqualification for future employment under the Government.

3. The petitioner’s case, in this writ petition, in brief, is as follows:-

(i) In pursuant to the advertisement dated 09.12.2011 bearing No. ED/EXAM/2010-11, issued by the Government of Nagaland, Directorate of School Education, whereby the applications were invited from the Naga indigenous inhabitant of Nagaland for filing up the post of Primary Teachers and Graduate Teachers in Elementary and Secondary Schools Education, the petitioner applied for the post of Graduate Teachers (Mathematics). After the recruitment examination, the petitioner was selected for the aforesaid post and by order No. ED-ESTT./DMR/SSA-1G/12 dated 22.03.2013 she was appointed as Graduate Teachers (Mathematics) in the Pay Band of PB-2, 9300-34,800/-and Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/-per month and joined her service on 26.03.2013 and was posted as Graduate Teachers (Mathematics), Duncan Ao, Dimapur. Before being appointed, the petitioner executed an undertaking dated 16.06.2012 to the effect that she shall complete B.Ed. within three years from the date of receiving of her appointment letter.

(ii) After being appointed, the petitioner submitted an application on 26.05.2014 to the Director of School Education through proper channel for undergoing B.Ed. course, however, the said application was misplaced by the office and subsequently the same was traced out and the department, on 10.10.2017 accorded ex-post facto approval for pursuing B.Ed course at Swami Vivekanand University, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh. However, by that time she had already completed her B.Ed. from the said university. She completed her Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) in the year 2014 from Swami Vivekanand University, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh securing first division.

(iii) On 17.02.2022, a show cause notice was issued by the Principal Director, Directorate of Secondary Education, Kohima against the petitioner under Rule 4(1) of the Nagaland Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1968 stating that she had submitted a fake Bachelor of Education Certificate and was directed to reply to the said show cause notice within ten days. The petitioner replied the said show cause notice on 28.02.2022 wherein she has stated she had undergone B.Ed. from the said university after obtaining approval for the same from the department and results have been declared online and, accordingly, she had submitted her B.Ed. certificate to the department, however, on 02.03.2022, the respondent No. 3, i.e., the Principal Director, Directorate of School Education, Nagaland issued a memorandum bearing No. ED/CON/A-2/2022/70 along with article of charges against the petitioner under Rule-9(2) of the Nagaland Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967 wherein it was alleged that the present petitioner has submitted fake Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) Certificate purportedly issued by the Swami Vivekanand University, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh and has utilized the fake document to mislead the department for availing undue service benefit and have thus violated Rule 4(1)(i) and (iii) of the Nagaland Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1968.

(iv) Though, the reply to the said memorandum of charges were given by the petitioner, however, a departmental inquiry was initiated and a board of inquiry was constituted to enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner. An inquiry notice dated 21st March, 2022 was also issued against the present petitioner directing her t