The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of clear and explicit reasons in administrative decisions to ensure fairness and justice.

P.K. Misra, J.

1. The present writ petition is directed against the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" in O.A.No.1608 of 2003 dated 20.11.2003. Such Original Application was filed by the present petitioner challenging the order of termination from service, which was ultimately dismissed without granting any relief.

2. The facts giving rise to filing of the Original Application and the present writ petition are as follows :-

The petitioner was working as Flock Man in the Animal Husbandry Department since 1983. At that time, the petitioner had not passed SSLC examination. Subsequently, the petitioner appeared in SSLC examination as a private candidate during 1988 and furnished the mark sheet, wherein it was indicated that he had passed all subjects in SSLC examination. Thereafter, on the basis of such certificate, he applied for the post of Veterinary Livestock Inspector and was selected on 20.4.2000 and was sent for training and joined the post in April, 2001. The Department sent the certificate for verification to the Director of Government Examination. They informed the Department that the mark sheet sent to them does not tally with the marks entered in the Original Mark Register. Upon the receipt of such information, the petitioner was placed under suspension and a departmental proceeding was initiated. In such departmental enquiry, the petitioner was examined and the enquiry officer submitted his report dated 7.2.2003 holding that the charge against the petitioner had been proved. Subsequently, the petitioner was dismissed from service, which was unsuccessfully challenged before the Tribunal. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. In the present writ petition it is contended by the petitioner that during the departmental enquiry, the authorities have simply relied upon the letter sent by the Director of Government Examinations without giving him any opportunity to prove the authenticity of the mark sheet and, therefore, the entire proceedings should be taken to be vitiated. It is further contended that the petitioner had merely produced the mark sheet given to him from the school in which he had privately appeared for the examination and, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner was responsible for submission of any forged mark sheet or incorrect mark sheet. It is further contended that, at any rate, the punishment of dismissal from service is grossly disproportionate and at least for the post of Flock Man there is no requirement of SSLC examination and, therefore, the petitioner could have been reverted to the original post.

4. The Supreme Court vide its decision in MAHARASHTRA STATE BOARD OF SECONDARY AND HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION v. K.S. GANDHI AND OTHERS reported in (1991) 2 SCC 716 has held that the principles of natural justice will depend on the nature of inquiry and the peculiar circumstances of each case. The relevant passages found in paras 17 20 & 21 may be usefully extracted below :-

"17. The students involved at the examination of secondary education are by and large minors but that by itself would not be a factor to hold that the students were unfairly treated at an inquiry conducted during the domestic inquiry. Assistance of an advocate to the delinquent at a domestic enquiry is not a part of the principles of natural justice. It depend on the nature of the inquiry and the peculiar circumstances and facts of a particular case. The regulations and the rules of enquiry specifically excluded the assistance of an advocate at the inquiry. Therefore, the omission to provide the assistance of a counsel at the inquiry is not violative of the principles of natural justice. The show cause notice furnished wealth of material particulars on which the tampering was alleged to be founded and gave the opportunity to each student to submit the explanation and also to adduce evidence, oral or documentary at the inquiry. Each student submitted the