DBSAW NO.951/08. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. J U D G M E N T D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.951/2008. IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6027/1992. Devi Singh Sharma Vs. State and ors. Date of order:- May 19, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Ashok Gaur for the appellant. ***** BY THE COURT:- This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 23/1/2006 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the order of his termination dated 23/4/1992 has been dismissed. 2) Shri Ashok Gaur, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant was appointed on the strength of order issued by the Government of Rajasthan duly recognizing the degree of Shiksha Sastri obtained from Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhyalaya and that at the time of order of appointment dated 20/12/1988, such recognition held good. The DBSAW NO.951/08. 2 respondents could not terminate services of the appellant without any notice and without providing opportunity of hearing. It is contended that appellant having been appointed had served more than four years. He has even placed the various documents on record to show that many persons having the same degree of Shiksha Sastri from the Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya are still serving with the respondent therefore, the appellant could not be singled out for being terminated from services. Learned counsel referred to the letter dated 31/12/2001 issued by the Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya and argued that it has been confirmed by that letter that appellant actually was awarded degree of Shiksha Sastri in the year 1988 vide Roll No.34512. There was no reason not to believe the guidelines of the said degree. Learned counsel for the appellant has further argued that even if the respondents holds that the degree is fake one, then also, the appellant could not be removed without any proper enquiry against him and without providing him any opportunity of hearing. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted judgment of the Supreme Court on which reliance was placed by the learned Single Judge in Karnataka SRTC Vs. SG Kotturappa : (2005) 3 SCC 409 is entirely distinguishable on facts inasmuch as, requirement of principles of natural justice could not be done away when order, which is ultimately passed, would have civil consequences in depriving the DBSAW NO.951/08. 3 appellant of his source of livelihood. 3) Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned-judgment, we find that the government had taken a categorical stand in its counter affidavit that degree of Shiksha Sastri obtained by the appellant, from Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya was not valid. It was contended by the government that name of Varanasi Sanskrit University was changed as Sampurananad Sanskrit University w.e.f. 16/12/1974 whereas the appellant has obtained the said degree in 1988. Government took specific plea that the said Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya was no longer in existence after 16/12/1974 and its name was changed to Sampuranand Sanskrit University. The government relied on the judgment of this Court in Shiksha Sastri Sangh Vs. State of Rajasthan : SBCWP No.2383/1989 dated 20/4/1992. 4) Learned Single Judge of this Court in Shiksha Sastri Sangh supra, on consideration of the material placed on record, specially the inquiries made from State of Uttar Pradesh and its various functionaries, held that in 1958, the Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya was established and, thereafter, the Uttar Pradesh Government vide its notification dated 11/7/1974 changed the name of this institution as Sampuranand Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya, Varanasi. However, its name as Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya remained valid upto 15/8/1974. The so- DBSAW NO.951/08. 4 called Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya was no more in existence after that date. It was held that confusion was created by the institution whereas actually this institution was not recognized by the Government of Rajasthan. 5) Respondents have also placed on record communication dated 26/6/1991 addressed by the University Grants Commission (UGC) to various States and also another communication dated 3/4/1989 sent by the Chairman of UGC to various States specifically enlisting Varanasi Sanskrit Vishvidhalaya asserting that such dubious institutions call themselves as Universities and confer degrees. This has created major problem to the UGC in dealing with them. The Government vide Circular dated 13/10/1992, withdrew its earlier circular dated 23/3/1992 whereby it was directed that appointment be given on the basis of degree of Shiksha Sastri issued by the Varanasi Sanskrit University. 6) In view of the categorical stand taken by the respondents in their counter affidavit before the learned Single Judge as also the finding recorded by this Court in Shiksha Sastri Sangh supra, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. In so far as the principles of natural justice are concerned, learned Single Judge was justified in holding that such principles cannot be applied in abstract and their applicability would DBSAW NO.951/08. 5 always depend on the facts of a given case. When sufficient material has been placed on record to show that the degree on the basis of which employment was secured by the appellant was not genuine one, respondents could not be required to fulfill empty formality by repeating the same order again after notice to the appellant. Judgment of the Supreme Court in Karnataka SRTC supra would therefore have full application to the facts of the present case too. We therefore do not find any merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (NARAYAN ROY), CJ. anil