Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
DEEPAK ROSHAN
Shilpi Kumari – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs:
(a) For quashing the order dated 09.01.2017 (Anexure-9) passed by the District Superintendent Of Education, Dhanbad by which the Petitioner who had been working as Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Chitladanga has been show caused and has been later on terminated from her service on the ground of submitting the invalid Τ.Ε.Τ Certificate (Teacher Eligibility Test) which is alleged not to have actually been issued by Jharkhand Academic Council.
(b) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents for payment of salary for the period from 23.12.2015 to 09.01.2017 to the Petitioner as she continued working over there for the aforesaid period as it is also recorded in her attendance register although she has never been communicated personally about her removal from this service by the Respondents.
(c) For direction upon the respondent to reinstate her in service after quashing of the removal order.
3. The brief facts of the case are that an advertisement bearing Advertisement No. 10
Provisional employee submitting forged qualification certificate not entitled to Article 311 protection; termination without full inquiry valid upon verification confirming forgery.
Termination of employment based on fraudulent documents is valid without a hearing, negating any employment rights.
A teacher's dismissal without following disciplinary procedures is unlawful, and a candidate pursuing a Teacher Training Course is eligible for the Teacher Eligibility Test.
The court upheld the termination of petitioners as they failed to prove their qualifications from a recognized institution, violating no principles of natural justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that without the minimum qualification, an employee has no right to continue in public employment, even if the employee was not at fault for obtain....
Fraudulent appointments are void ab initio, and individuals securing employment through deceit cannot claim protections under Article 311 of the Constitution.
The court reaffirmed that judicial decisions regarding employment rights must be respected, and that grounds for termination or denial of appointment must be substantiated with valid evidence, partic....
Termination of service without a proper inquiry violates Article 311(2) of the Constitution, emphasizing the necessity of due process in employment matters.
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
