Genuine documents are essential to prove eligibility for employment.

Heard learned counsel, Mr. P.K. Pal for the petitioner and learned CGC, Mr. A. Roy Barman for the respondents.

2. Pursuant to an advertisement for filling up of the post of constable/fitter of the Central Reserve Police Force (in short, CRPF) under the respondents, the petitioner participated in the selection process and was successful in the selection test. By writing letter dated 14.02.2011, petitioner was asked to report to the Group Commandant of the CRPF, Agartala and accordingly he reported to his duties on 12.03.2011. Thereafter by writing a letter dated 01.04.2011 (Annexure IV to the writ petition) the respondents asked him to proceed to his home town immediately. Being compelled the petitioner left for his home town and subsequently on query he came to learn from Maharana Pratap Industrial Training Centre, Bhiwani, Haryana wherefrom he obtained certificate of trade test in Motor Mechanic that the respondents made communication with that Institute in respect of the genuinity of provisional certificate and final certificate issued by the Institute in the name of the petitioner. The Institute informed the respondents that the petitioner undergone the course from July 2007 to August 2009 and that the certificate was genuine. Since the petitioner did not receive any communication from the respondents he approached respondent No.3 on 26.02.2013 with an application under the Right to Information Act and pursuant to that application he was informed that the competent authority cancelled his candidature for the reason that the provisional certificate and the final certificate presented by the petitioner was not genuine. An FIR was lodged against the petitioner in the East Agartala Police Station which was registered as East Agartala P.S.Case No.7/12 under Section 468/471/34 of IPC alleging that the petitioner obtained fake documents and submitted the same for his recruitment and police after investigation submitted final report stating that the certificate was genuine. Even after ascertaining the genuinity of the trade certificate of the petitioner, he was not allowed to join the post and hence, petitioner filed the writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to allow him to join the post and also prayed for quashing letter dated 01.04.2011 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) and letter dated 20.08.2011 (Annexure XIV to the writ petition).

3. Respondents contended that the offer of appointment was issued to the petitioner subject to verification of his certificate/testimonials including the certificate of technical qualification on presentation of the original before the appointing authority at Agartala. When the originals were presented, it was found that the provisional certificate and original certificates in respect of technical qualification of the petitioner were conflicting with each other and to remove the discrepancies letter was written to the particular Institute and after verification since it was found that the certificates were not genuine, the petitioner was debarred from joining the post.

In Para 9 of the counter affidavit the respondents stated thus:

“9. That, in reply to the statement made in para 5 of the writ petition I say that no such provisional trade certificate bearing No.081474 dated 25/9/2009 was submitted by the writ petitioner and as such, the allegations/statements made in para 5 of the writ petition is strongly denied. It is further to be stated here that while checking the testimonials of the writ petitioner, the following shortcomings/variations have been noticed in connection with provisional certificates submitted along with his application form and original certificate:

Provisional certificate submitted along with application form	Original certificate su