Point of Law: when a candidate has been offered appointment on the basis of one of many certificates and then, he has served the respondents for two years, the respondents are required to take a bit liberal view, unless the certificate, which was produced, itself is found to be forged.

ORDER :

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the communication dated 26.07.2021, whereby the respondents have refused to consider petitioner’s certificate of merit issued by Jump Rope Federation of India.

2. The facts appertain are that the petitioner applied for the post of Teacher Gr.III, Level-2, Subject Social Studies, pursuant to recruitment notification dated 31.07.2018. While submitting his application form, the petitioner staked his claim towards Outstanding Sportsperson Category, indicating “Yes” in the concerned column of application form. The petitioner, being meritorious on the basis of the criteria mentioned in the advertisement, was called for document verification.

3. According to the petitioner, when he appeared for document verification, though he had two certificates, namely, Gold Medal in RGOI National Pro-Kabaddi League, 2018 (hereinfter referred to as ‘First Certificate’) and certificate evincing that he stood third in 9th Senior Jump Rope Championship, 2012-13 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Second Certificate’), but he produced the First Certificate only as he had secured gold-medal in such event, because the second certificate showed that he had secured 3rd position in the tournament.

4. According to the petitioner, respondents considered the petitioner to be an outstanding sportsperson on the basis of his first certificate (RGOI National Pro-Kabaddi League, 2018) and offered him appointment vide order dated 05.07.2019.

5. After joining the services, the petitioner has been serving the respondents, when he came to receive a notice dated 10.06.2020, alleging that the petitioner has been wrongly considered as an outstanding sports-person on the basis of certificate of RGOI National Pro-Kabaddi League, 2018. It may be noted that said notice was issued pursuant to letter dated 08.06.2020 issued by the Director – respondent No.3 requiring the respondent No.4 to terminate petitioner’s services after observing principles of natural justice.

6. The petitioner preferred a writ petition before this Court being SBCWP No.5301/2021, challenging the communication dated 08.06.2020 issued by the Director, inter alia, contending that the petitioner had another certificate of 9th Senior Jump Rope Championship, 2012-13 (the Second Certificate), in which he stood third. While apprehending that the respondent No.4 would feel bound by the directives of its Director, it was prayed that the respondents be directed to consider petitioner’s Second Certificate. Petitioner’s aforesaid writ petition was not entertained by this Court finding it to be based on apprehension. However, an observation was made in the order dated 06.04.2021, which reads thus:-

“1. The petitioner was selected on the post of Teacher Grade-III Level 2, subject Social Studies, pursuant to recruitment notification dated 31.07.2018 under the category of Outstanding Sports Person.

2. The petitioner had thereafter received a notice dated 08.06.2020, inter alia, indicating that certificate of RGOI National Pro Kabaddi League 2018, is not issued by recognized body, hence his appointment under the Outstanding Sports Person category is against the rules.

3. Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had also participated in Jump Rope Federation of India and stood 3rd, but, since he had a certificate of Gold Medal in relation to RGOI National Pro Kabaddi League 2018, the respondents had considered only such certificate and offered him appointment without considering his other certificate relating to Jump Rope Championship 2012-2013.

4. It is also pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that in response to the notice dated 08.06.2020, the petitioner has submitted a representation and requested the respondents to consider other certificate of Jump Rope Championship.

5. He apprehends that respondents will not consider the same.

6. The present writ petition is therefore disposed of with a direction to t