SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(All) 1218

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
D. S. Sinha and Dev Kant Trivedi, JJ.
AVADHESH KUMAR PANDEY - Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT BASIC EDUCATION OFFICER - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 777 Of 1983
Decided On : 09/13/2000

Advocates Appeared:
HARSH NARAIN SHARMA

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court will not entertain applications for recalling orders if the petitioners have lost interest in the matter and the application amounts to an abuse of the process of law.

Headnote:

Order IX, Rule 13 - Application for recalling order - Code of Civil Procedure - Section 151 - [Order IX, Rule 13, Section 151] - The court discussed the application under Order IX, Rule 13 (wrongly mentioned in place of Rule 9) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recalling the order dated 20. 8. 1996 whereby the Writ Petition No. 777 of 1983 was dismissed.

Fact of the Case:

The applicants filed a Writ Petition for quashing the order cancelling their admission in B. T. C. and discharging them from training, based on forged mark-sheets and certificates.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners had made false averments and failed to take necessary steps to pursue their case, leading to the conclusion that the petition had become infructuous by lapse of time. The court also observed that the recall application amounted to an abuse of the process of law and rejected it.

Issues: Forgery in admission, lapse of time, abuse of process of law

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the petitioners had lost interest in the matter and the petition became infructuous by lapse of time. The recall application was deemed an abuse of the process of law and was rejected.

Final Decision: The application for recalling the order was rejected, and notice was issued to one of the petitioners to show cause as to why action should not be taken against him for making wrong averments.

DEV KANT TRIVEDI, J.


( 1 ) APPLICANTS have moved an application under Order IX, Rule 13 (wrongly mentioned in place of Rule 9) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recalling the order dated 20. 8. 1996 whereby the Writ Petition No. 777 of 1983 was dismissed.

( 2 ) APPLICANTS Avadhesh Kumar Pandey and three others filed a Writ Petition No. 777 of 1983 for quashing the order dated 27. 9. 1982 passed by Basic Shiksha Adhikari,. Gorakhpur, cancelling the admission of Sri Avadhesh Kumar Pandey, Sri Duryodhan Das, Sri Praslddh Yadav and Sri udai Mal Rao in B. T. C. and also for quashing the order dated 19. 10. 1983 whereby the Principal of Prem Chand Government Junior Training College. Gorakhpur, has discharged the petitioners from training.

( 3 ) BY means of an interim order dated 21. 1. 1983, the respondents were directed to permit the petitioners to attend their classes of the Second year.

( 4 ) THE respondents filed a counter-affidavit.

( 5 ) THE following averments were made in the affidavit of the Principal of Prem Chand government Junior Training College, Gorakhpur.

( 6 ) SRI Avadhesh Kumar Pandey had filed a copy of the mark-sheet of High School Examination of 1978 showing that he had passed the High School Examination in 1st division. He also filed character certificate showing that his date of birth is 1. 1. 1956. He had also filed the original mark-sheet of Intermediate Examination of 1980 and the character certificate allegedly issued from Janta Shiksha Niketan Intermediate College, Dubari. District Azamgarh. On an enquiry having been made. It transpired that Sri Avadhesh Kumar Pandey, petitioner No. 1, passed High school Examination in the year 1967 in 2nd division and his date of birth was 1. 1. 1954. The petitioner No. 1, Sri Avadhesh Kumar Pandey, had filed a forged mark-sheet of High School and intermediate Examination and had also filed a forged character certificate showing his date of birth as 1. 1. 1956 in place of 1. 1. 1954.

( 7 ) THE petitioner No. 2, Sri Duryodhan Das, son of Surya Nath, had indicated in his form that he had passed Intermediate Examination from Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru Intermediate College, tilaura. District Gorakhpur in 1st division while on an enquiry. It was found that the said institution was only up to High School and there was no question of his passing the Intermediate examination from the said institution.

( 8 ) THE petitioner No. 3, Sri Prasiddh Yadav, had submitted attested copy of the mark-sheet of high School Examination showing that he had passed in 1st division while on an enquiry, it was found that he had passed the said High School Examination in 2nd division. He had also filed a copy of the mark-sheet showing that he had passed Intermediate Examination in 1975 from Seth anand Ram Jaipuria Intermediate College. Anand Nagar, Gorakhpur, but on an enquiry, it was found that he had passed Intermediate Examination in 3rd division.

( 9 ) THE petitioner No. 4, Sri Udai Mal Rao, had indicated in Form that he had passed his intermediate Examination in 1979 in 1st division, while in fact he had passed the Intermediate examination in 2nd division. The petitioners were admitted in B. T. C. on the basis of false, fictitious and forged mark-sheets and certificates. They had filled in their forms in their own hand writing and signatures with a view to secure admission in B. T. C. course.

( 10 ) THIS counter-affidavit was sworn on 7. 9. 1983 annexing therewith photocopies of the admission forms and Annexures thereto.

( 11 ) IN the rejoinder-affidavit filed on 24. 10. 1995 on behalf of Duryodhan Das, Petitioner No. 2, claiming that in the application correct division, marks and years of passing of High School and intermediate Examination were given. He also claimed that he had passed High School and intermediate Examination from the Rastriya Intermediate College Balli, Nichlaul, District gorakhpur and he had passed High School Examination in 2nd division and Intermediate e


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top