IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4877 of 2010 JAWAHAR MANDAL S/O LATE PRATAP MANDAL R/O VILL.- MANGARA, P.S.- DHARAHARA, DISTT.- MUNGER --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY, RAILWAY DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI 2. GENERAL MANAGER, EASTERN RAILWAY, JAMALPUR 3. CIVIL WORK MANAGER, EASTERN RAILWAY, JAMALPUR 4. ASSISTANT WORKS MANAGER (D&C) EASTERN RAILWAY JAMALPUR 5. DY. CHIEF MECHANICAL ENGINEER (D), JAMALPUR 6. WORKSHOP PERSONNEL OFFICER, EASTERN RAILWAY, JAMALPUR 7. CONFIDENTIAL ASSISTANT EASTERN RAILWAY, JAMALPUR --- RESPONDENTS ----------- 02 29.03.2010 Heard Mr. Radhey Shyam Prasad for the petitioner, and Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, for the respondents. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 12.09.2008 (Annexure-8), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A. No. 705 of 2002 (Jawahar Mandal Vs. The Union of India and Ors.), whereby the original application preferred by the present writ petitioner has been dismissed, and the order of the authorities removing him from service has been upheld. The writ petition is further directed against the order of Tribunal whereby his application for review of the said order has been rejected. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. The respondent authorities had issued advertisement dated 12.09.1983 (Annexure-1), inviting applications for appointment as Khalasi. The two conditions of the 2 same relevant in the present context are that the maximum age of a candidate of unreserved category should be 28 years on 01-09- 83, and they should be literate. After completion of the selection process, the petitioner was appointed as a Khalasi. Much after the petitioner was appointed, the authorities received information that the School Leaving Certificate along with his initial application in proof of his date of birth and educational qualification was a false and fabricated document. The respondent authorities decided to initiate a departmental proceeding. Charge sheet for major penalty dated 19.10.1995 (Annexure-3), was served on him. The learned enquiry officer submitted his report wherein he, inter alia, found that petitioner was never student of R. B. High School, Jamalpur, and, therefore, the same was obviously a fabricated document. The learned disciplinary authority accepted the enquiry report and imposed the penalty of removal from service leading to the aforesaid O. A. No. 705 of 2002, which has been rejected by the impugned order. Hence this writ petition. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It appears that the following two eligibility criteria are relevant in the present context: ^^3& mez %& uhps fn, x, ^^d** ls ^^p** rd ds ekeys dks NksM+dj 1-9-83 dks 18 o"kZ ls de vkSj 28 o"kZ ls vf/kd mez ugha gksuh pkfg,A ¼M+½ vkjf{krksa ds fy, 40 o"kZ dh mez rdA 4- ;ksX;rk %& mEehnokjksa dks lk{kj gksuk pkfg, vFkkZr ;s fdlh Hkh Hkk"kk esa lkekU; okD;ksa dks fy[k i<+ ldrs gksaA” 3 It is evident that the candidates of the unreserved category to which the petitioner belonged had to satisfy the authorities that he had not exceeded 28 years of age on 01.09.1983, and was literate. The petitioner submitted the certificate issued by the R.B. High School, Jamalpur, and certified both the conditions. It is thus evident that the petitioner had satisfied the eligibility criteria on the basis of the certificate which has been found to be a false and fabricated document. It has been found both by the learned enquiry officer as well as the learned Tribunal that the petitioner was never a student of R.B.High School, Jamalpur. We are, therefore, of the view that the order of removal from service was a valid order. We uphold the order of the Tribunal on the original application, as well as the review application. We do not find merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Sym (S.K.Katriar,J.) ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)