JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV KUMAR, J.

Cav No. 2201/2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the Caveator.

2. Caveat stands discharged.

WP (C) No. 3639/2025

1. This writ petition filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and four others, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge an order and judgment dated 29.01.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, Jammu [“the Tribunal”] in TA No. 8263/2021 titled Nazir Hussain vs. State of J&K and others, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the petition of the respondent and quashed the order of his dismissal dated 08.04.2015, passed by petitioner no. 2 herein with a further direction to reinstate the respondent in service within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order. The petitioners have also been given a liberty to proceed against the respondent in accordance with law.

2. Impugned judgment is assailed by the petitioners on multiple grounds, however, before we advert to the grounds of challenge urged by Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, learned GA, we deem it appropriate to set out few facts as are necessary for appreciating the controversy raised in this petition in right perspective.

3. The respondent, pursuant to selection process conducted by the petitioners, came to be appointed as Physical Education Teacher in Government Middle School Laytar Zone, Panchari, District Udhampur vide order No. DYSSO/U/4819-4952 dated 19.01.2011. The appointment of the respondent was subject to verification of character/antecedents and eligibility certificates issued by the competent authority.

4. The respondent had been selected and appointed as Physical Education Teacher on the basis of his qualification of C.P.Ed. which is claimed to have been acquired by the respondent in the year 1995 from Lokmata Indira Gandhi College of Sports Yavatmal, Maharashtra under the Directorate of Sports and Youth Services, Pune, Maharashtra. The qualification certificate of the respondent, purportedly issued by the Directorate of Sports and Youth Services, Maharashtra State, Pune was sent by the District Youth Services and Sports Officer, Udhampur to the competent authority in Maharashtra for verification alongwith two others who were also possessing the similar qualification.

5. The Assistant Director Headquarter in the Directorate of Sports and Youth Services, Maharashtra State, Pune vide his communication dated 23.02.2011 intimated to petitioner no. 2 herein that the C.P.Ed. certificate of the respondent was verified and found correct, accordingly, the Deputy Director Central informed the District Youth Services and Sports Officer, Udhampur vide communication 16.02.2012 that the verification of the C.P.Ed certificate produced by the respondent had been received and the same had been found genuine. On the basis of this verification, the respondent was allowed to continue and was confirmed on completion of two years’ probation period.

6. It seems that one Mohd. Hussain lodged a complaint against the respondent before the State Vigilance Commissioner alleging therein that the respondent had secured employment as PET on the basis of a fake C.P.Ed certificate. The then State Vigilance Commissioner forwarded the complaint to the Director of Youth Services and Sports, Jammu with a direction to conduct proper verification of the certificate of C.P.Ed submitted by the respondent. The petitioners once again took up the matter with the Directorate of Youth Services and Sports, Maharashtra for re-verification of the certificate of C.P.Ed submitted by the respondent at the time of his appointment.

7. This time a re-verification report came and it was conveyed by the Directorate of Youth Services and Sports, Maharashtra State Pune that the name of the respondent was not found against the Roll No. 7373 in the result register in the year 1995 and, therefore, the certificate produced by the respondent was not authentic.

8. Having obtained the adverse report with regard to the C.P.Ed qualification cert