LPA No. 227 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 227 of 2011 Date of decision 26 .7 .2011 Parvesh Puhal . Appellant Versus . Union of India and others .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Dr. Surya Parkash , Advocate for the appellant Mr.Rahul Thomas, Advocate for Mr. R. Kartikey, Advocate for respondent no.1 Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate for respondents 2 and 3 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 14.10.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the appellant made a wrong claim before the respondent by showing that he has gained experience by working at the gas agency of his father at Panipat namely M/s Panipat Gas Agency. It has come on record that for the same period i.e. 2003-04 he was enrolled as a regular student at Jivaji University, Gwalior and infact successfully completed his LL.B. Course in the year 2005-06. Year 2003-04 is common for LL.B. course as well as for the experience he is claimed to have gained. The findings of the learned Single Judge are discernible from following two paras: “ 7 The petitioner has though selectively concealed the fact that M/s Panipat Gas Agency, Panipat, where he is said to have LPA No. 227 of 2011 2 gained the experience is owned and run by his own father, namely, Ramesh Puhal, never-the-less, this fact was reluctantly admitted during the of hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, made a strenuous effort to explain that even as a regular student of L.L.B. course where the petitioner was required to secure 75% lectures only, he used to work at M/s Panipat Gas Agency during the period. 8 In my considered view, the aforesaid plea is simply an after thought. Since the petitioner is said to have been a regular student in the LL.B. degree course at a far away place like Gwalior, it would be too far to accept that he simultaneously kept on working at M/s Panipat Agency also. Both the factual pleas taken by the petitioner cannot be recnciled and one of them is atleast false. The possibility of securing a working experience certificate is more probable as M/s Panipat Gas is his family business. The Experience Certificate relied upon by does not disclose or indicate that the experience was gained by him intermittently . The petitioner apparently did not disclose the true and correct facts to the respondent-Corporation nor has approached this Court clean hands.” 2. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant at some length we are of the considered view that once there is categorical finding that the appellant has made an attempt to claim experience in respect of the period when he was perusing his professional LLB degree course, which is at a far away place, then there is no possibility for him to work at Panipat. The certificate awarded to him by the Jivaji University, Gwalior for the LPA No. 227 of 2011 3 year 2005-06 would show that he was a student in the years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. The respondents have made it very clear that anybody who would furnish false information, his allotment is liable to be cancelled forthwith and in case distributorship has commissioned then the same would be terminated. Therefore, we do not find any legal infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge warranting interference of this Court. The appeal does not merit admission. Dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Gurdev Singh) .2011 Judge okg