- 1 - S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6269/2003 (Shyam Choudhary vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) DATE OF ORDER : 3-4-2008 HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.P.P.Choudhary, for the petitioner. Mr.Shyam Ladrecha, Addl. Government Counsel. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18/09/2003 (Annex.P/8), so also to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits. The facts leading to this case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Teacher Gr.III after due selection vide Annex.2 dated 21/11/1991. In pursuance to appointment order (Annex.2) dated 21/11/2001 the petitioner assumed his duties on 30/11/1991. Since the petitioner was possessing the B.Ed. Degree from Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, therefore, for verification the degree was sent to the said University. Vide communication dated 16/11/1991 the Assistant Registrar, Purvanchal University informed the District Education Officer, Pali that in the year 1990 no candidate in the name of Shyam Choudhary son of Deva Ram Choudhary appeared in the examination under Roll No.166291. On the basis of said information, the services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 6/4/1992 which is placed on record - 2 - as Annex.R/1. Further, FIR was also registered against the petitioner for submitting fake B.Ed. Degree, which is said to be acquired from Purvanchal University, Jaunpur. In the FIR filed against the petitioner after usual investigation, challan was filed under Section 420 and 471 IPC and after due trial the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali acquitted the petitioner from the said charges vide its judgment dated 21/2/2003. After acquittal from the criminal court, petitioner moved an application for taking him back on duty but his application was rejected while observing that only the basis of acquittal from criminal court he is not entitled for reappointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though earlier on 16/11/1991 the Assistant Registrar, Purvanchal University, Jaunpur informed the District Education Officer, Pali that the degree of petitioner is forged one but later on vide communication dated 23/4/1992 it was informed that due to mistake earlier communication dated 16/11/1991 was sent by the University and infact the petitioner appeared in the B.Ed. Examination of 1990 under the Roll No.166291. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that after clarification issued by the University on 23/4/1992 and acquittal from the criminal court, the petitioner is very much entitled to be reinstated in service but the respondents have illegally passed an - 3 - order dated 18/9/2003, whereby, respondents have denied the claim of reinstatement of petitioner on the ground that merely acquittal from the criminal court does not entitle him for reinstatement. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that initially petitioner's services were terminated without giving any notice to him only on the basis of communication received from Purvanchal University, Jaunpur but later on when the said University clarified that earlier information was not correct and it is specifically stated that due to mistake wrong information was sent earlier, therefore, after clarification about genuineness of the B.Ed. Degree and acquittal from the criminal court, petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service, so also the termination order is illegal because services of the petitioner were terminated without holding any proper inquiry and without affording him any opportunity of hearing. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that services of the petitioner were terminated vide Annex.R/1 dated 6/4/1992 and thereafter petitioner was facing trial and ultimately he was acquitted of the charges but still the degree obtained by the petitioner on the basis of which he was provided appointment cannot be termed to be genuine because services of - 4 - the petitioner were terminated in the year 1992 on the basis of information received by the Purvanchal University, Jaunpur upon verification of the said degree by the District Education Officer, Pali and in the said communication it was specifically stated that petitioner did not appear in B.Ed. Examination under Roll No.166291 in the year 1990, therefore, now on the basis of acquittal by the criminal court petitioner is not entitled to be reinstated in service. After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the pleadings of the case, first of all it is clear that the termination order dated 16/11/1991 was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner but at the same time petitioner also did not challenge the order by way of filing appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum because he was facing trial. In the criminal case, the petitioner was acquitted of the charges levelled against him and likewise as per the clarification issued by the Purvanchal University, Jaunpur on 23/4/1992 the B.Ed. degree of the petitioner is also duly verified by the University, therefore, petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, it can be said that the respondents have failed to prove the - 5 - charge against the petitioner for the offence under Section 420 and 471 IPC, but at the same time it is also necessary to verify whether the communication Annex.P/5 dated 23/4/1992 received by the District Education Officer, Pali is genuine or not. In the circumstances, this writ petition is partly allowed. The order dated 18/9/2003 is hereby quashed with a direction to the respondents that both the communications dated 16/11/1991 (Annex.4) and 23/4/1992 (Annex.5) may be sent to the Purvanchal University, Jaunpur with a messenger so as to get verification of B.Ed. Degree from the said University. Upon verification from the Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, if the petitioner's B.Ed. Degree is found to be correct then petitioner shall be reinstated in service on the post of Teacher Gr.III with all consequential benefits. The above exercise shall be carried out within a period of three months from today. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. Pankaj Baweja