IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 OP.No. 27979 of 2002(E) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- N.S.VASAN, S/O.NATESAN PANDIT, AGED 52 YEARS, DUSTING OPERATOR, ANGADIPURAM, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR MR.GEEN T.MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE ZONAL MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, MADRAS.6. 2. THE SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DISTRICT MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, PALAKKAD. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI, SC, FCI SMT.S.KARTHIKA THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.47679/2002 IN OP. NO.27979/2002 DISMISSED 16/02/2010 SD/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 4.6.1976. P2:- COPY OF THE MATRICULATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY VARANASI VISWA VIDYALAYA DTD. 25.3.1989. P3:- COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DTD. 29.11.69. P4:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CWP 14357/90 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARIYANA. P5:- COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT MANAGER, FCI, TRICHUR TO THE PETITIONER. P6:- COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 26.7.1994. P7:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE IST RESPONDENT DTD. 15.10.94. P8:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE COUNSEL OF VARANASI VISWA VIDYALAYA TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P9:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 3.9.96. P10:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. 5599/97 DTD. 1.4.97. P11:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE IST RESPONDENT DTD. 4.6.97. P12:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE REGISTRAR OF UNIVESITY OF CALICUT DTD. 13.3.98. P13:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. NO.11521/97 DTD. 17.10.01. P14:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN RP. NO.26/02 DTD. 13.3.02. P15:- COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DTD. 24.5.02. P16:- COPY OF THE MARK LIST NO.9097 DTD. 1.6.01 ISSUED BY THE HINDI VIDYAPETH DEVGHAR (JHARKHAND) AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION. OP. NO.27979/2002 P17:- COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE NO.12282 DTD. 1.6.01. ISSUED BY THE HINDI VIDYAPETH DEVGHAR (JHARKHAND) AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION. P18:- COPY OF THE MARK LIST NO.5136 DTD. 30.9.02 ISSUED BY THE HINDI VIDYAPETH DEVGHAR (JHARKHAND) AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION. P19:- COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE NO.0908 DTD. 6.3.03 ISSUED BY THE HINDI VIDYAPETH DEVGHAR (JHARKHAND) AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION. P20:- COPY OF THE PROMOTION ORDER NO.O.O.NO.96/09/E.I DTD. 22.7.09. P21 :- NIL. P22:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 22.6.89 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT, P23:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO. ESTT. 32 (3)/2007 DTD. 20.11.09 ISSUED BY THE AREA MANAGER , FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, PALAKKAD. P24:- COPY OF THE EXT.P2 CERTIFICATE AVAILABLE WITH THE RESPONDENT. P25:- COPY OF THE HALL TICKET WITH REGISTRATION NO.9025 DTD. DECEMBER 1988. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P. No. 27979 of 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the Food Corporation of India at Palakkad who is due to retire from service this year. He is challenging Ext.P15 order passed by the 1st respondent, refusing to treat Ext.P2 Matriculation Certificate produced by the petitioner as a valid certificate to prove his qualification for the purpose of promotion. Petitioner is an ex-service man. He joined the service of the Food Corporation of India as a Watchman on daily wages as per Ext.P1 order dated 04.06.1976. The next promotion post for the petitioner is Assistant Grade-III. The qualification prescribed for the post is matriculation. 30% of the vacancies arising in that post are earmarked for being filled up by promotion from among qualified Watchmen. (Counsel for the respondents submits that the qualification of matriculation is only for promotion and for W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -2- direct recruitment the qualification is degree). The petitioner claims to have passed matriculation from the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi. He claims to have written the Poorva Madhyama (with English) examination of the said Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi in 1998 and passed the said examination for which he obtained Ext.P2 matriculation certificate from the said institution. According to the petitioner, the Government of India had, by Ext.P3 office memorandum dated 29.11.1969, recognized the Poorva Madhyama (with English) qualification as equivalent to high school examination for the purpose of employment under the Central Government. Petitioner would contend that by Ext.P4 judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court the qualification of Poorva Madhyama (with English) of Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya has been recognized by the State of Haryana as equivalent to high school examination for the purpose of employment. Petitioner would further contend that as evidenced by Ext.P12 W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -3- communication issued by the Registrar of the University of Calicut to the petitioner, dated 13.03.1998, the Purva Madhyma Exam conducted by the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi and the certificate issued to that effect on or before 08.02.1990 is recognized as equivalent to matriculation of the State of Kerala for all purposes under the said University. Relying on the said matriculation certificate the petitioner stated a claim for promotion as Assistant Grade-III. But instead of considering the petitioner's claim for promotion, by Ext.P5 memo petitioner was directed to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against the petitioner for supplying false information regarding the petitioner's qualification, suspecting the genuineness of Ext.P2 certificate. Petitioner had submitted Ext.P6 explanation stating that the petitioner's matriculation certificate is genuine. By Ext.P7 dated 15.10.1994, the Assistant Manager (Administration) of the Food Corporation of India informed the 1st respondent that steps are being taken up with the Ministry W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -4- of Education, Government of India, New Delhi to confirm whether the certificate is genuine and if the same is genuine whether it is equivalent to matriculation. Thereafter the petitioner contacted Dr. D.P. Tripathi, Advocate of the Supreme Court who, according to the petitioner, was the Advocate of the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, who issued Ext.P8 communication to the District Manager of Food Corporation of India, Palghat stating that on verifying the records of the institution, the petitioner had passed Purva-Madhyama examination of the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya in 1998, vide Roll No.9025 and that the said Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya is an autonomous oriental institution, which was closed with effect from 21.04.1993 as per the undertaking made before the High Court of Delhi in W.P. No. 441/1993. However the respondents were not prepared to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion on the basis of Ext.P2 matriculation certificate. Therefore the petitioner approached this court by filing W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -5- O.P.No.5599/1997, in which, by Ext.P10 judgment, this court directed the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on representation dated 03.02.1997 filed by the petitioner. In that judgment it was also made clear that the 1st respondent must review the promotions effected to the juniors of the petitioner in case, a decision on Ext.P11 is in favour of the petitioner. Pursuant thereto Ext.P11 order dated 04.06.1997 was passed by the 1st respondent holding that the petitioner is not eligible to be promoted as Assistant Grade-III on the strength of the certificate submitted by him. Petitioner again approached this court by filing O.P. No.11521/1997, in which, Ext.P13 judgment was passed holding that in view of absence of the date in the copy of Ext.P2 produced before this court the petitioner has not been successful to remove the suspicion on Ext.P2 and therefore no direction can be issued to the petitioner for promotion. But it was made clear that it will not stand in the way of the petitioner to make appropriate representation as and when he obtains a certificate with W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -6- date. Later on, by Ext.P14 order in R.P. No. 26/2002, this court clarified that if the petitioner has got a certificate showing the due date of his acquisition of qualification, he can make a representation to the respondent concerned, who shall dispose of the same within one month, after hearing the petitioner. It is pursuant to the said order that Ext.P15 has been passed, rejecting the claim of the petitioner to treat the certificate submitted by him as valid certificate equivalent to matriculation. Petitioner now submits that in view of the documents now produced by the petitioner, there is absolutely no reason to suspect the genuineness of the Ext.P2 certificate, produced by the petitioner. He would point out that the date 25.03.1989 was all along there in the certificate, but unfortunately in the copy produced before this court in O.P. No.11521/1997 the date was not legible. It is pointed out by the petitioner that even in Ext.P5, which was issued in 1994 the District Manager of the Food Corporation of India, Trichur, himself mentioned the date of petitioner's matriculation certificate W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -7- as 25.03.1989 and therefore there was absolutely no reason to suspect the genuineness of the certificate on the ground that the certificate did not bear any date. On the strength of Exts.P22, P23 & P24 the petitioner points out that the petitioner had immediately after obtaining Ext.P2 certificate, got a copy of the same certified as true copy by the then Assistant Manager (Accounts) Food Corporation of India, Palghat in 1989 which was produced before the Area manager in proof of acquisition of qualification of matriculation, a copy of which was obtained by him by resort to proceedings under the Right to Information Act, which is Ext.P24, which would also conclusively show that a copy of Ext.P2 containing the date 25.03.1989 was available in the records of the Food Corporation of India as early as in 1989. Ext.P24 is the copy of Ext.P2 certified as a true copy by the Accounts Manager of the FCI itself. Therefore the stand taken by the respondents that because of absence of date in the certificate, the genuineness of the same is in doubt lacks bonafides. Petitioner would contend W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -8- that the petitioner has sufficiently proved that Ext.P2 is a genuine document, proving his qualification of matriculation and going by Ext.P3, P4 & P12, the same should be accepted as equivalent to high school certificate in which case the petitioner would be entitled to promotion with effect from the date on which the petitioner had produced Ext.P2 staking his claim for such promotion. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents disputing the contentions of the petitioner. They still maintain that Ext.P2 is not a genuine document for more than one reason. It is contended that as is clear from Ext.P2 itself, the name shown in Hindi therein is A.N. Vasan whereas the petitioner is N.S. Vasan, although in English the name is correctly shown as N.S. Vasan, which casts a doubt on the genuineness of the certificate. They would also contend that the institution from which the petitioner had obtained the certificate has not been recognized by the UGC as an institution competent to issue such a certificate. The respondents also rely on W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -9- Ext.R1 (b) newspaper report wherein 15 institutions, including the institution from which the petitioner claims to have obtained Ext.P2 certificate has been declared as fake universities. They still maintain that the absence of date in the copy produced before this court casts a doubt on the genuineness of the certificate. They also point out that Ext.P25 copy of the hall ticket produced by the petitioner for the examination written by him for obtaining Ext.P2 certificate, the seal of the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi is different from the seal obtaining in Ext.P2 certificate. It is further pointed out that in Ext.P2, the petitioner is stated to have appeared for examination both in Sanskrit and in Malayalam whereas in Ext.P25 Time Table for the examination Sanskrit is given as an alternate to Malayalam and both the examinations were conduct on 26.12.1988. Further it is submitted that in Ext.P2 the petitioner is stated to have passed Social Science as a subject, whereas in Ext.P25 time table for the examinations Social Science is not mentioned, instead W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -10- History and Geography are mentioned. According to the counsel for the respondents, these are more than sufficient grounds to suspect genuineness of Ext.P2 certificate and therefore Ext.P2 certificate cannot be relied upon for the purpose of considering the petitioner's claim for promotion. The counsel for the respondents also points out that in Ext.P2 Hindi is also an optional subject although the petitioner has chosen Malayalam as the optional subject. In Ext.P25 time table there is no schedule for examination in Hindi for those who opted Hindi as optional subject, which also casts a doubt regarding the genuineness of Ext.P25 itself. 3. In answer to the contentions raised by the respondents, the counsel for the petitioner would contend that the discrepancies pointed out by the counsel for the respondents are purely imaginary. The time table does not state that Sanskrit and Malayalam are alternate to each other. W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -11- 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. At the outset I find lack of bonafides on the part of the respondents in taking the stand that because of the absence of the date in the copy of Ext.P2 filed before this court in O.P. No.11521/1997, genuineness of Ext.P2 is suspect. In Ext.P5 issued to the petitioner in July 1994 itself the District Manager has referred to copy of matriculation certificate dated 25.03.1989 issued by the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi. That being so it is clear that on that date they had in fact a copy of Ext.P2 with the date 25.03.1989 therein. Ext.P24 is a copy of the very same certificate which has been certified as a true copy by the Accounts Manager of the Food Corporation of India Palakkad in 1989 itself. Ext.P24 has been in their possession ever since 1989. That being so the contention taken that because of the absence of the date in the copy the genuineness of Ext.P2 is suspect is clearly an act lacking in bonafides on the part of the respondents. W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -12- 5. The respondents have not chosen to dispute the existence of Exts.P3 & P4 and also Ext.P12. Those documents prove that at least three authorities have recognized the Poorva Madhyama (with English) of the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi as a qualification equivalent to high school examination for the purpose of employment in one State, in one university and under the Central Government. The Food Corporation of India is a wholly owned Central Government organisation. That being so, when the Central Government accepts that a particular qualification as equivalent to high school examination, the Food Corporation of India cannot validly contend that the said certificate cannot be accepted as equal to matriculation certificate of the State of Kerala, for the purpose of service benefits in Food Corporation of India. Therefore, I hold that matriculation certificate issued by the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi has to be accepted as equivalent to matriculation certificate for the purpose of promotion in the Food Corporation of India. W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -13- 6. That does not automatically mean that Ext.P2 is a genuine document. But on a perusal of Ext.P2, I am unable to find that it is a fabricated document. Of course it is true that the initial of the petitioner is wrongly stated in Hindi but in the English portion of the same certificate the initials are also given correctly. If the petitioner had fabricated that document it is difficult to believe that the petitioner would commit such a fundamental mistake in writing his initials wrongly even if in Hindi. Therefore, I do not have any difficulty in accepting that entering of wrong initials in Hindi must have been a mistake committed by the person who prepared the certificate. The petitioner has chosen to support Ext.P2 with Ext.P25 copy of the hall ticket for the examination and Ext.P25 time table for the examination. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that on account of difference in the seals in the Ext.P2 & P25 genuineness of Ext.P2 is also suspect, also does not appeal to me. One cannot assume that seal to be affixed in an important certificate would be freely available to a W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -14- Section Clerk who issues the hall ticket. So naturally the section would have a different seal for use. As such the difference in the seals cannot be accepted as a ground to doubt the genuineness of Ext.P2. Of course the time table has not been explained properly. If it was a time table applicable to all matriculation examinations, it should contain a date for Hindi examination for those who had chosen Hindi as the second language. The time table does not contain any date for the Hindi examination. So also Sanskrit and Malayalam are shown as alternate in Ext.P25 time table, which is also not properly explained. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that both the examinations were on 27.12.1988 and therefore both have been shown together. Regarding the absence of Social Studies as a subject, the counsel for the petitioner would argue that History and Geography are two papers for Social Studies itself and therefore those two examinations were shown separately in the time table. Although that time table has not been explained to total satisfaction, I find that W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -15- the petitioner has subsequently passed the examination equivalent to Degree accepting which, by Ext.P20, the petitioner has been promoted to the post of Assistant Grade- III on 22.07.2009 with effect from 05.06.2009 by the FCI themselves. Petitioner could not have appeared for such higher examination without first having satisfied the institution which conducted the higher examination that he had already passed matriculation. That degree has been accepted by the respondents themselves as sufficient for giving promotion to the petitioner. As such, I am of opinion that despite the discrepancies pointed out Ext.P2 cannot be regarded as a fake document. As such, I am satisfied that the petitioner had proved that he had obtained the matriculation in the year 1989. Consequently the petitioner should have been given promotion from the date from which his immediate junior was promoted after he produced Ext.P2 before the respondents. But in view of the fact that it is because of the inability of the petitioner himself to satisfy the respondents about the genuineness of Ext.P2 W.P.(C)No. 27979 of 2002 -16- appropriately the whole imbroglio arose, I am not inclined to give the petitioner benefit of backwages. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner would be deemed to have been promoted as Assistant Grade-III from the date from which his immediate junior was promoted after the petitioner produced Ext.P2 certificate before the respondents as evidence of his having acquired the qualification of matriculation. Petitioner's pay shall be re-fixed accordingly, without arrears of monetary benefits. However the petitioner would be entitled to retirement benefits on the basis of the pay so fixed. Orders in this regard shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/