IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 23657 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANSON P.ANTONY, GENERAL SECRETARY, COCHIN UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES UNION, COCHIN UNIVERSITY, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CHANCELLOR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KALAMASSERY, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KALAMASSERY. 4. V.K.ASHOKAN, GARDEN MAISTHIRI, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KALAMASSERY. 5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. 6. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE, ALUVA. ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC,COCHI UVSTY FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.23657/2009-B ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 14th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the General Secretary of the Cochin University Employees' Union. The allegation raised is that the fourth respondent furnished forged and false education certificate for claiming appointment and promotion. Ext.P5 is the representation submitted by the petitioner. It was followed by another representation produced as Ext.P6 also. 2. It is clear from the pleadings and from Ext.P7 that the University had inquired into the matter by constituting a Committee. They contacted the Principal of the Government Higher Secondary School, North Paravoor to verify the genuineness of the certificate issued from the school. The school authorities orally informed that the signature of the Principal of the Certificate appears to be genuine. The Committee also contacted the District Educational Officer to verify the authentication of the Certificate issued. The D.E.O also reported that the signature appears to be that of the then Principal Smt.K.R.Jayadhara. Accordingly, the Committee decided to recommend, to accept the certificate and to treat the matter as closed. 3. The University had already conducted the enquiry through the Committee and they are also satisfied with the genuineness of the W.P.(C). No.23657/2009 -:2:- certificate. Even without establishing any defect in the said enquiry, the petitioner seeks for a direction to conduct a fresh enquiry in the matter. 4. It is clear that the University inquired into the matter in the light of the representation given by a service organisation. The view taken in Ext.P7 is a plausible one. It cannot be said to be influenced by any other considerations also. In that view of the matter, I do not find any reason to entertain the writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms