é H!GH GOURT QF QHHATTISGARH AT iBlLASPlJR DB: Hon’bhe Shri Dhirendra MiJhra & Hort’ble Shri RN. Chandrakar, JJ. Writ-Appeal No.51!2m.1 b Kamlesh Pate! S/o. Shri Radheshyam Patei, aged. about 25 years, Occupaficn Service Shiksha Karmi Grade- 3, postEd ét Primary Schoo! itwan, Tahsii fvias‘turi Rio ViIEage aHd Post Masturi: district Bilaspur (CG) Amit Katetiha S/o. Shri SP. Kateliha, aged about 37 years, ‘Occupationi Service, Shiks'na Karmi Grade-3, Posted at Primary Schooi Mudpa’r (Khorsi), Tahsi! Masturi, R./o. 'Vlnage ande post Mastur District Bilaspur (CG) Chandrashekhar Tiwar, S/e. Shri Ramakant Tiwari. aged bout 25 years, Occupation Service, Shiks'na Karmi Grade 3, posted at Primary School Kata'na, Tahsii iviasturi, Rio. Village and Post Maihar, Tahsii MasturiDistrict Biiaspur (CG) Shyam KarriQsharma Sic. Shri Dinband'nu Sharma, aged about 33 years, Occupation Service, Shiksha Karmi Grade 3, posted at' Primary Schooi Dehanpara Karra, Tahsii Masturi, R/o. \Jiliage and Post Beisari, Tahsii Takhatpur, District Biiaspur (CG) Mott Singh Thakur Slo. Shri Kanwai Singh Thakur, aged about '32 years, Occupation Service, Shiksha Karmi Grade 3, posted at Primary School Sonsari, Tahsii Masturi, Rio. iiiage Sondhar Post ppeitaiitsi Petittbners i. A i a ‘ V \“C\ ‘ Dh’arampura,‘ Tahsil Mungeli, district Biiasgur (CG) 1Ku!deep Sin h Tha'kur slo shri Kanwal Sing’h Thakur, aged about 32 y'ears,r0ccupation $ervice, Shiksha Karmi Grade 3, posted a? Primary Schoo! Gadhiyapara Sonsari, Tahsii Masturi, Rio. Viliage Sondhar Post V Dharampura, Tahsii' MungeLi, District Bilaspur (CG) i The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary; Panchayat ' and' Rura! Deveiopment Department, .Mantraiay at DKS Bhewan, Raipur (CG) - The Director, Pancheyat, Chhattisgarh., Raipur, District Raipur (CG) The Coliector, Biiaspur District Biiaspur (CG) e e ) r he ie Ex Resporidents The Chif Executiv Officer, trict Fanchat, Biiasp Dis ay ur (CG T Chf ecutive Officer, Janpa ayat, Masi, d Pncha tur D e () istrict Biiesprr CG Uniersit ant Cmission,’ reresent by i Sretar, ew lhi. Netia! ouncil for Te o ruh eber cr, -i.P. tate, arg, e h Nn Cunc! for h Eda rn g Cmme h egna Dio, Shni atioal oi Teacer uction, Northe Reional oitte, throug Rioi rectr at Path, Tilek Nag, aipur Rajatn ar J (sha) hara Shiha ad U.P.. throuh i Secretary, The vy Gr om ped ts ecy N De on C acher Educatin, thog Mm Seretay 15 Es MG. M Nw Deli. Btiy ks Parish g ts \9‘3 Bharat BhaWan, Matiyari Road, Chinhat, lFaizabad Road, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. J Present Shrl Shanendra Dubey counsel for the aopeHants Shrl MPS Rhafla Dy Cnw Advocam for the State i QaALo ! i I Grievance of the appeuants before !eamed, Sing!e Judge was that they possessed requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Shiksh‘a Karmi Grade-iii; they appiied for the advertised 3-59 posts by Janpad Panoha’yat, Masturih and after passing written examination conducted by Chhattisgarh Professiona! Examination Board, they were appointed inwlarious schoois as' Shiksha Karmi Grade-Hi. However, on the basis of faise compiaints, sewioes of appeiiants No.1, 5 & 6 were terminated without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity of hearing to them and because of the said Complaint, appointment of appellants No2, 3 & 4 were withheld. Writ petition (3} No.501l2009, filed by appellants No.2, 3 & 4 was disposed of with a direction to the appellants to make representation before the authorities for redressal of therr grievances Thereafter the appellants were reappointed and they rejoined their posts immediately. However, respondent No.5, vide memo dated 1am March, 201.0; directed the appetlants to produce documents relating to affi!iation of Bhartiya Shiksha Parisahd, Lucknow, (herein after ‘the Parishad‘) with National Council for Education and Training ' (herein after ‘the NC-TE’) further to clarify the position when the (17.92.2911) i;f» A C X V Arr RDER k \(7\ Parishaid ha$ been declared as forged institlltion by the University ‘ Grants Commiseien (herein after 'the UGC’) end further to produce ‘ any document showing recognition of the said institution 'with the UGC, within a period of 15 days. Reply to the above notice was duly submitted, however, the appeiiants have beeh again served with a notice on 10.91 .2010 directing the appellants tto ciarify the status of the Parishad tiii 13.01. .201 1. Shri Shailendra Dubey, learned oounsel for the appeiiants submits that issUe of recognition of the said Parishad is subject matter of writ petition ‘No.27.16!1997. fiied byi respondent No.9 before High Court of Allahabad and in the said writ petition, Hon’bie High Court, while issuing inotioes to the other side on 27.10.1997 directed that in the meantime, it is provided that petitioner shall carry out teachers training programme until the disposal of the appiication by the opposite partyNo.2. Other writ petitionsare aiso pending in the Lnr‘know Bench of Allehabad High Court in which oases reiating to the recognitron of the Parishad are stlil pending However Without considerinn the pendenr‘y of the above pro eed'ngs the wrtt petition has been dismissed by learned Single Bench With an observation that the petition is premature as no pause of action has arisen to enable the petitioners to approach this Court. On theiother hand, teamed counsel for the State would argue that the appellants have been served with notices for producing documents relating to recognition of the Parishad and no decision has been taken on the reply filed by them to the earlier notice and thus, learned Sinledudge has held that the petition is premature. g IQ Jaw. 'J(J V ' Heard !earned counse! for the parties, perused the records. On careful examination of the record! particuiarw, the documents and the pteadings appended thereto, we ate of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that the petitioners could not supply a single document with regard to recognition and affiliation of the Parishad with the NCTE or the UGC.: As per the condition of the appointment, it is clear that if any documents submitted by the candidates are found to be forged at any point of time, or it has been issued by any i.stitution which is not duly recognized or affiliated to the NCTE or the UGC, then the employe. ca. take approp.iate action against the employee, who has submitted the degree/diploma certifioate issued by the forged institution. However, learned Single Judge, considering that no coercive action has been taken against the appellants and only at the stage of notice petition has been filed, dismissed thepetition as premature. We are in agreement with the aforesaid findings of the learned Single Judge. The appeal beingrdevoid of substance deserves to be and is, accordingly, dismissed at the admission stage itself. l Bini 3)( . ..,. ‘ Sd/- , Dhirehdra Mishra Judge 6