Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(All) 2499

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT, J.
Hirdesh Kumar – Petitioner
versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others – Respondent
WRIT - A No. - 16640 of 2024
Decided on : 19-12-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate
For the Respondent:- C.S.C.,Manvendra Singh

Employment obtained through fraudulent documentation does not require adherence to formal disciplinary procedures, as fraud vitiates employment.

Headnote:(A) U.P. Government Servant Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1999; Principles of Natural Justice - Termination of services of Assistant Teacher on grounds of submitting forged examination certificate - Petitioner contended termination lacked proper inquiry and violated principles of natural justice - Court held that the procedure followed was lawful and just, with adequate opportunity afforded to petitioner to contest the charges. (Paras 18-21)

(B) Fraud vitiates employment - The court reiterated that employment obtained through fraudulent documents does not require adherence to regular disciplinary procedures for termination. (Paras 20-21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was terminated after the Intermediate Examination Certificate submitted at the appointment was verified as forged by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. A show cause notice was issued, and the petitioner was given the opportunity to contest this before the termination. (Paras 2-8)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the disciplinary authority correctly followed the procedure in accordance with the principles of natural justice and rejected the petitioner's defenses, leading to lawful dismissal. (Paras 13-21)

Issues: 1. Whether the termination was compliant with principles of natural justice? 2. Was a full-fledged departmental inquiry required?

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the employment obtained based on false documentation cannot invoke the protections of formal disciplinary procedures, and noted that adequate opportunity to contest was provided to the petitioner. (Paras 20-21)

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. termination due to forged certificate. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding termination process. (Para 3 , 4)
3. verification of educational qualifications. (Para 5 , 6 , 8)
4. natural justice was followed. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. fraud invalidates employment. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
6. disciplinary inquiry necessity clarified. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)
7. judgment upheld; petition dismissed. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Bhanot, J.

1. The judgment is being structured in the following conceptual framework to facilitate the discussion:

I.	Introduction
II.	Submissions of learned counsel for the parties
III.	Issues
IV.	Facts
V .	Compliance of principles of natural justice
VI.	Departmental Enquiry: District Basic Education Officer and another vs. Punita Singh and others rendered in Special Appeal Defective No. 506 of 2024
VII. Conclusion

I. Introduction:

2. By the impugned order dated 28.09.2024 the services of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher have been terminated on the footing that the Intermediate Certificate submitted by the petitioner at the time of his appointment was found to be forged.

II. Submissions of learned counsel for the parties:

3. Shri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel assisted by Shri Parashar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner made the following submissions:

a. The order of termination was not preceded by a regular departmental enquiry.

b. The show cause notice reflected a predetermined mind set.

c. The report sent by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. was not served upon the petitioner which precluded him from contesting the same.

d. There was no requirement of filing of Class XII marksheet at the time of appointment since the petitioner was in possession of higher eligibility qualifications. Hence even if the marksheet was forged the petitioner stood nothing to gain from the same.

e. The petitioner relies upon the judgment passed by this Court in Sarfaraz Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and others reported at 2013 (3) ESC 1542 (All).

4. Ms. Shruti Malviya, learned counsel and Sri Manvendra Singh learned counsel for the Basic Shiksha Adhikari submit as under:

I. The educational certificates submitted by the petitioner at the time of appointment were found to be forged.

II. The Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. which had purportedly issued the aforesaid certificates had affirmed the fraudulent character of the aforesaid certificates in a written report.

III. Prior to termination of services of the petitioner he was given full opportunity of tendering his defence and the report sent by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. was served upon the petitioner.

IV. Principles of natural justice were duly complied with prior passing the impugned order.

V. There was no requirement of regular departmental enquiry in such cases in view of the law laid down by this Court in District Basic Education Officer and another vs. Punita Singh and others rendered in Special Appeal Defective No. 506 of 2024.

VI. The show cause notice was not issued with a predetermined mind set but fully reflects application of mind to the material in the record. III. Issues:

(i) Whether the impugned order was passed in compliance of principles of natural justice ?

(ii) Whether there was requirement to hold a full fledged departmental enquiry in facts of this case ?

IV. Facts:

5. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 11.02.2009. A complaint was received regarding genuineness of the Intermediate Examination Certificate that was submitted by the petitioner at the time of his appointment. The said certificate was purportedly issued by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. Pursuant to the complaint the authenticity of the said Intermediate Examination Certificate was examined afresh by the appointing authority. A report was sent by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. which finds that the Intermediate Certificate submitted by the petitioner at the ti