Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(All) 238

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, JJ.
Kiran Lata Singh - Appellant
Vs.
State Of U.P. Through Secretary,Department Of Basic Education And 5 Others – Respondent
SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 326 of 2020 with Special Appeal Nos. 167 of 2020, 315 of 2020, 316 of 2020, 317 of 2020, 318 of 2020, 319 of 2020, 320 of 2020, 321 of 2020, 322 of 2020, 323 of 2020, 324 of 2020, 325 of 2020, 327 of 2020, 328 of 2020, 329 of 2020, 330 of 2020, 331 of 2020, 332 of 2020, 333 of 2020, 334 of 2020, 335 of 2020, 336 of 2020, 337 of 2020, 338 of 2020, 339 of 2020, 340 of 2020, 341 of 2020, 342 of 2020, 343 of 2020, 344 of 2020, 345 of 2020, 346 of 2020, 347 of 2020, 355 of 2020, 356 of 2020, 357 of 2020, 358 of 2020, 359 of 2020, 360 of 2020, 361 of 2020, 362 of 2020, 363 of 2020, 364 of 2020, 365 of 2020, 366 of 2020, 367 of 2020, 368 of 2020, 369 of 2020, 370 of 2020, 379 of 2020, 380 of 2020, 381 of 2020, 382 of 2020, 383 of 2020, 384 of 2020, 388 of 2020, 389 of 2020, 390 of 2020, 391 of 2020, 392 of 2020, 393 of 2020, 394 of 2020, 395 of 2020, 396 of 2020, 397 of 2020, 398 of 2020, 399 of 2020, 400 of 2020, 401 of 2020, 402 of 2020, 403 of 2020, 404 of 2020, 405 of 2020, 409 of 2020, 410 of 2020, 411 of 2020, 412 of 2020, 413 of 2020, 414 of 2020, 415 of 2020, 416 of 2020, 417 of 2020, 418 of 2020, 423 of 2020, 424 of 2020, 425 of 2020, 426 of 2020, 427 of 2020, 428 of 2020, 429 of 2020, 430 of 2020, 431 of 2020, 433 of 2020, 434 of 2020, 435 of 2020, 436 of 2020, 437 of 2020, 438 of 2020, 441 of 2020, 442 of 2020, 443 of 2020, 447 of 2020, 448 of 2020, 449 of 2020, 450 of 2020, 451 of 2020, 452 of 2020, 453 of 2020, 454 of 2020, 455 of 2020, 456 of 2020, 457 of 2020, 458 of 2020, 459 of 2020, 460 of 2020, 461 of 2020, 462 of 2020, 466 of 2020, 467 of 2020, 468 of 2020, 469 of 2020, 470 of 2020, 471 of 2020, 472 of 2020, 473 of 2020, 474 of 2020, 477 of 2020, 478 of 2020, 479 of 2020, 480 of 2020, 482 of 2020, 483 of 2020, 484 of 2020, 485 of 2020, 487 of 2020, 488 of 2020, 489 of 2020, 490 of 2020, 491 of 2020, 496 of 2020, 497 of 2020, 498 of 2020, 499 of 2020, 500 of 2020, 501 of 2020, 502 of 2020, 503 of 2020, 504 of 2020, 505 of 2020, 506 of 2020, 507 of 2020, 508 of 2020, 509 of 2020, 510 of 2020, 511 of 2020, 512 of 2020, 513 of 2020, 514 of 2020, 515 of 2020, 518 of 2020, 519 of 2020, 520 of 2020, 521 of 2020, 522 of 2020, 523 of 2020, 524 of 2020, 525 of 2020, 526 of 2020, 527 of 2020, 528 of 2020, 529 of 2020, 530 of 2020, 531 of 2020, 532 of 2020, 533 of 2020, 534 of 2020, 535 of 2020, 536 of 2020, 537 of 2020, 538 of 2020, 539 of 2020, 540 of 2020, 541 of 2020, 542 of 2020, 543 of 2020, 544 of 2020, 545 of 2020, 546 of 2020, 547 of 2020, 548 of 2020, 549 of 2020, 550 of 2020, 551 of 2020, 552 of 2020, 556 of 2020, 558 of 2020, 559 of 2020, 560 of 2020, 561 of 2020, 562 of 2020, 563 of 2020, 564 of 2020, 565 of 2020, 566 of 2020, 567 of 2020, 568 of 2020, 569 of 2020, 570 of 2020, 571 of 2020, 572 of 2020, 573 of 2020, 574 of 2020, 575 of 2020, 576 of 2020, 577 of 2020, 578 of 2020, 579 of 2020, 580 of 2020, 581 of 2020, 582 of 2020, 583 of 2020, 584 of 2020, 585 of 2020, 586 of 2020, 587 of 2020, 588 of 2020, 589 of 2020, 590 of 2020, 591 of 2020, 592 of 2020, 593 of 2020, 594 of 2020, 595 of 2020, 596 of 2020, 597 of 2020, 598 of 2020, 599 of 2020, 600 of 2020, 601 of 2020, 602 of 2020, 603 of 2020, 604 of 2020, 605 of 2020, 606 of 2020, 607 of 2020, 608 of 2020, 609 of 2020, 610 of 2020, 611 of 2020, 612 of 2020, 613 of 2020, 614 of 2020, 615 of 2020, 616 of 2020, 617 of 2020, 618 of 2020, 619 of 2020, 620 of 2020, 621 of 2020, 622 of 2020, 623 of 2020, 624 of 2020, 625 of 2020, 626 of 2020, 627 of 2020, 628 of 2020, 629 of 2020, 630 of 2020, 631 of 2020, 632 of 2020, 633 of 2020, 634 of 2020, 635 of 2020, 636 of 2020, 637 of 2020, 638 of 2020, 639 of 2020, 640 of 2020, 641 of 2020, 642 of 2020, 643 of 2020, 644 of 2020, 645 of 2020, 646 of 2020, 647 of 2020, 648 of 2020, 649 of 2020, 650 of 2020, 651 of 2020, 652 of 2020, 653 of 2020, 654 of 2020, 655 of 2020, 656 of 2020, 657 of 2020, 658 of 2020, 659 of 2020, 660 of 2020, 661 of 2020, 662 of 2020, 663 of 2020, 664 of 2020, 665 of 2020, 666 of 2020, 667 of 2020, 668 of 2020, 669 of 2020, 670 of 2020, 671 of 2020, 672 of 2020, 673 of 2020, 674 of 2020, 675 of 2020, 676 of 2020, 677 of 2020, 678 of 2020, 679 of 2020, 680 of 2020, 681 of 2020, 682 of 2020, 683 of 2020, 684 of 2020, 685 of 2020, 719 of 2020, 730 of 2020, 736 of 2020, 737 of 2020, 738 of 2020, 739 of 2020, 740 of 2020, 741 of 2020, 742 of 2020, 743 of 2020, 744 of 2020, 745 of 2020, 746 of 2020, 748 of 2020, 749 of 2020, 762 of 2020, 763 of 2020, 764 of 2020, 765 of 2020, 766 of 2020, 768 of 2020, 769 of 2020, 770 of 2020, 771 of 2020, 772 of 2020, 773 of 2020, 777 of 2020, 780 of 2020, 781 of 2020, 782 of 2020, 783 of 2020, 784 of 2020, 785 of 2020, 786 of 2020, 787 of 2020, 788 of 2020, 789 of 2020, 795 of 2020, 796 of 2020, 797 of 2020, 798 of 2020, 799 of 2020, 800 of 2020, 801 of 2020, 802 of 2020 and 6 of 2021 and with Special Appeals (Defective) No. 837 of 2020, 981 of 2020, 1000 of 2020, 1032 of 2020, 1034 of 2020, 1035 of 2020, 1036 of 2020, 1037 of 2020, 1039 of 2020, 1041 of 2020, 1042 of 2020, 1043 of 2020, 1044 of 2020, 1045 of 2020, 1046 of 2020, 1047 of 2020, 1048 of 2020, 1049 of 2020, 1050 of 2020, 1051 of 2020, 1052 of 2020, 1102 of 2020, 1107 of 2020, 1112 of 2020, 1116 of 2020, 1122 of 2020, 1146 of 2020, 1157 of 2020, 1159 of 2020, 1164 of 2020, 1165 of 2020, 1170 of 2020, 1171 of 2020, 1173 of 2020, 1176 of 2020, 1177 of 2020, 1179 of 2020, 1221 of 2020, 1235 of 2020, 1237 of 2020, 1241 of 2020, 1250 of 2020, 1251 of 2020, 1252 of 2020, 1253 of 2020, 1255 of 2020, 1256 of 2020, 1258 of 2020, 1259 of 2020, 1266 of 2020, 1284 of 2020, 1322 of 2020 and 26 of 2021.
Decided On : 26-02-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant :Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate),Rajendra Singh Yadav,Satya Prakash Maurya
For The Respondent: C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Gagan Mehta,Jagannath Maurya,Nisheeth Yadav

Point of law: If the University records a finding about any of the candidates holding tampered mark-sheets, then the order of termination/cancellation of appointments would have effect but it would be from the date of the order passed by the University and accordingly for a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment by the University, the order of termination/cancellation of appointments of the candidates holding tampered mark-sheets is kept in abeyance. Those candidates would be allowed to work with payment of salary.

Headnote:
Prevention of Corruption Act – Section 13 – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 204, 201 read with 120 – State Universities Act, 1973 – Section 67 – U.P. Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973 – U.P. Government Servant (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1999 – Appointments of the petitioners – Termination – Writ petitions were filed to challenge the order passed by the District Basic Education Officer by which the appointments of the petitioners/appellants on the post of Assistant Teacher were cancelled/terminated. – It was alleged that appointments sought were based on fake or tampered mark-sheets/degrees of B.Ed. Examination, 2005.
Finding of the court: Order of termination/cancellation of appointments would be governed by the outcome of the order passed by the University, as agreed by the learned counsel for the appellants. – If the University hold mark-sheets to be genuine instead of tampered of any of the appellants, the order of termination/cancellation of appointments, those would stand set aside. – However, if the University records a finding about any of the candidates holding tampered mark-sheets, then the order of termination/cancellation of appointments would have effect but it would be from the date of the order passed by the University and accordingly for a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment by the University, the order of termination/cancellation of appointments of the candidates holding tampered mark-sheets is kept in abeyance. – Those candidates would be allowed to work with payment of salary. – It is, however, made clear that in case any of the candidate fails to participate in the proceedings initiated by the University or delays it, this order would not be to their benefit and accordingly, the direction herein above would remain operative only for a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order by the University. – On the expiry of the period given above, the order of termination/cancellation of appointments would become effective and thereby the University is directed to complete the exercise within the period given above. – In case any candidate fails to cooperate with them, then a separate order for it can be passed but University would not, in any case, delay the process and for that no extension would be given by this Court rather default of the University to comply the direction aforesaid would have consequences of stoppage of salary of those who have to take action and to pass order in pursuance to the direction of this Court. – Vice Chancellor of the University would monitor compliance of this order and in case of delay, he would not be entitle to salary. – University would be at liberty to make inspection of the marks folio lying with the Registrar, High Court or the S.I.T. for the purpose of verification, if so required and accordingly Registrar, High Court as well as S.I.T. is directed to cooperate with the University for it.
Result: – Appeals Disposed of

JUDGMENT :

Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J.

Heard Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, Sri H.N. Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vineet Kumar Singh, Sri Radha Kant Ojha, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shivendu Ojha, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi and Smt. Arti Raje, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/appellants. Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Rama Nand Pandey, Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Sri Rajiv Singh is appearing for the State Government, Sri Ashok Mehta, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Gagan Mehta is appearing for the Agra University and Sri J.N. Maurya, learned counsel is appearing for the U.P. Education Board/Basic Shiksha Adhikari.

The batch of appeals have been filed to assail the judgment dated 29.04.2020 whereby bunch of writ petitions were decided.

The writ petitions were filed to challenge the order passed by the District Basic Education Officer by which the appointments of the petitioners/appellants on the post of Assistant Teacher were cancelled/terminated. It was alleged that appointments sought were based on fake or tampered mark-sheets/degrees of B.Ed. Examination, 2005.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AND PREVIOUS LITIGATION

The facts available on record and taken into consideration by the learned Single Judge, reflect that the education was made a saleable product by the Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra (for short “University”) and thereby the candidates, who even did not appear in B.Ed. Examination, 2005 were conferred with the mark-sheet and degree. The other allegation is for tampering of marks apart from candidates having same roll numbers on the mark-sheets.

The efface of the University came in the knowledge of the Court when a writ petition was filed by one Sunil Kumar bearing Writ Petition No. 2906 of 2013 on issuance of two mark-sheets to him by the University for B.Ed. Examination 2005. The learned Single Judge hearing the said writ petition directed the University to produce the tabulation sheets of B.Ed. Examination, 2005. In pursuance to the direction aforesaid, the tabulation sheets were produced. It was not bearing signature of any authorized officer/person of the University. The learned Single Judge hearing the said writ petition passed an order on 28.02.2013 directing the Vice Chancellor of the University to file an affidavit in respect to the B.Ed. Examination 2005. The affidavit was sworn. The learned Single Judge observed cross list/tabulation sheets to be manufactured documents in absence of signature of the officer. It was admitted by the University that tabulation sheets/cross list are always signed by the authorized officer/person otherwise it cannot be accepted as genuine.

In pursuance to the subsequent order dated 28.02.2013, the then Vice Chancellor Professor D.N. Jauhar filed an affidavit stating that a three member inquiry committee was constituted on the receipt of the complaint and information regarding manipulation and discrepancies in the mark charts. The committee found following discrepancies-:

(i) Font of computer printing on some pages are different from other pages;

(ii) Font quality on paper used in different pages defers;

(iii) The signature of authorized person of agency was also found different on different pages.

The learned Single Judge hearing the writ petition of Sunil Kumar passed another order on 23.01.2014 for impartial inquiry into the affairs of the University in regard to B.Ed. Examination, 2005. In pursuance to the order dated 23.01.2014, the State Government constituted a Special Investigation Team (For short “S.I.T.”). The writ petition of Sunil Kumar was then treated to be a Public Interest Litigation, thus to be placed before the Division Bench. After referring the matter to the Division Bench, the record of said writ petition was not found traceable, thus matter could not be heard for further direction. The file was reconstituted in the year 2020 pursuant to the order of the Court.

The S.I.T.