IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.266 of 2009 ZAFAR IMAM . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 02. 22.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner was appointed as Matric Trained Teacher vide Memo No. 1032, dated 05.10.1982 by the District Superintendent of Education, Gaya and posted in Urdu Primary School, Bajukhurd, Mohanpur in the district of Gaya. Petitioner’s case is that though he was appointed as Matric Trained Teacher, but at the time of his appointment, he was not trained. Subsequently, under the guidance and assistance of the Department itself, he attended the training camp from 06.06.1987 to 15.06.1987, organized by the State Education Research and Training Council and obtained training Certificate. Petitioner, after his appointment in the year 1982, continued on the post, but after 25 years of his service, for the first time in the year 2006, question was raised regarding legality of his appointment and query was made regarding genuineness of Certificate of training. The 2 District Superintendent Education, Gaya issued a letter, asking to submit all relevant documents and testimonials relating to qualification in order to examine the eligibility of the petitioner for being appointed as Assistant Teacher. Petitioner’s case is that he submitted all his Certificates in the office of DSE, Gaya on 18.06.2007 and the DSE, Gaya without examining the correctness of his testimonials and Certificates as well as without giving him any opportunity to explain, passed an order of termination vide order, contained in letter dated 06.07.2007. The D.S.E. passed this order in hurry as he had been transferred. Petitioner was terminated from his service on the ground that his appointment was made on the basis of forged training certificate. Counsel for the petitioner submits that against the illegal and arbitrary order of DSE, petitioner submitted his objection before the Deputy Director of Education, which was treated as an appeal. The D.S.E. vide order, contained in Memo No. 201, dated 03.03.2008 was directed to make a fresh enquiry, giving opportunity to the petitioner to place his case and only after thoroughly examining 3 the genuineness of his testimonials, any order should have been passed. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, vide order dated 10.05.2008, issued a direction to all concerned persons to appear before him. A report was called from the District Superintendent of Education. The DSE submitted a report that he has valid reasons to believe that certificates of the petitioner are forged. The Regional Deputy Director of Education vide memo no. 567, dated 10.07.2008 directed the DSE to look into the matter by adopting fair procedure of verification and also indicating that all the decision should be taken after following the correct measure for verification of documents. Thereafter, nothing has happened, but on account of earlier order, dated 06.07.2007, passed by the DSE, Gaya, the petitioner is still being treated as terminated from his service. Counter Affidavit has been filed on behalf of the DSE, Gaya Respondent No. 5, stating that the records indicate that several complaints were received from different quarters regarding the appointment of Assistant Teacher made on the basis of forged Educational Certificates. In order to ascertain reasonableness of the complaints and 4 legality of the appointment of the Teachers, the Teachers were asked to submit their testimonials and Certificates. Even after repeated request, the Teachers were not submitting their Training Certificates. Similarly, the petitioner also did not submit his Certificate and that was the reason that it was presumed that the petitioner has not undergone Teachers Training and if at all he has any certificate of training, that is not genuine. Counsel for the petitioner on the other hand submits that admittedly his initial appointment as Trained Teacher was made even though he was un- trained. That was well within the knowledge of the Appointing Authority and that was the reason that under the guidance and assistance of authorities concerned, he attended the Training Course and Certificate of training was issued by the Authorities themselves as such there was no question of getting appointment on the basis of forged / false certificate. So far the allegation regarding non- submission of the Certificate is concerned, it is incorrect. The petitioner received such intimation for the first time in the year 2006 and thereafter, he submitted his Certificates for perusal and 5 examination of its genuineness. The allegation regarding non-production of the Certificates for appointment on the forged basis, is completely against the record. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has also produced before me a copy of judgment and order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10568 of 2007 and its analogous cases. Facts of these cases are similar to the facts of the present case. In that case also, the petitioners were appointed on the post of Matric Trained Teacher in the Government Schools in the year 1982-83, being untrained and subsequently, under the guidance and assistance of the authorities, they got themselves trained, but their appointments were cancelled. All these petitioners were terminated from service on the ground that their initial appointment as trained Teacher was on the basis of forged Certificates. The finding recorded in this order is that since petitioners were untrained at the time of their initial appointment, though appointed as Matric Trained Teachers from this, an inference could have been drawn that the appointment must have been made on the basis of a forged Matric Trained Certificate. Such inference has been drawn 6 merely on presumption, as none of the Counter Affidavit even a single forged Certificate has been annexed in support of such allegation. Factually, there is nothing on record in support of this inference. Forgery unless proved can not be a basis for passing adverse order against petitioner’s appointment. In the case of the present petitioner also no reason has been shown in the Counter Affidavit for drawing this inference that on the basis of forged Certificates, petitioner was appointed as Trained Teacher. Counsel, appearing for the State, however, has hammered only one point, i.e., non-production of Certificates by the petitioner. This has already been replied by the petitioner that for the first time he came to know about the notice for production of his Certificate in the year 2006 and thereafter, he has produced his Certificates. The petitioner has also annexed his Training Certificate as Annexure-2 to the Writ Application. In the Counter Affidavit, no statement has been made regarding Annexure-2 being forged. Considering all these facts, I do not find that 7 the order, passed by the DSE, Gaya, dated 06.07.2007, Annexure-4, has been passed after examining the complaint in accordance with law, giving opportunity to the petitioner to show-cause. Considering the finding recorded by the Regional Deputy Director of Education that without examining the Certificates and giving proper opportunity to the petitioner, termination order has been issued, it is apparent that order passed by the D.S.E. is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. Otherwise also, for coming to this conclusion that appointment of the petitioner was on the basis of forged documents, except mere inference and presumption, there is nothing. In the light of the order, passed by the Deputy Director of Education, dated 20.07.2008, contained in Memo No. 567, till date no further enquiry has been made. I do not find that there is any reason to continue with any such enquiry, considering the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the order, contained in Annexure-4, letter dated 06.07.2007, DSE, Gaya with regard to termination of service of the petitioner is quashed. Petitioner will be deemed to be in service. Respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner 8 with effect from the date of his termination with all consequential benefits. Accordingly, this Writ Application is allowed. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)