IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.9082 OF 2007 MANJU KUMARI, W/O SRI ANIL KUMAR SINHA, R/O VILLAGE HASANPUR, P.O. KORWAN POLICE STATION HILSA, DISTRICT NALANDA. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DARBHANGA. 3.THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA. 4.THE CIVIL SURGEON CUM CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, DARBHANGA. 5.THE MEDICAL OFFICER (INCHARGE), PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, GHANSHYAMPUR, DARBHANGA. ………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 30.09.2011 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. The grievance of the petitioner as with regard to her discontinuation of service in view of the impugned order seems to be wholly misconceived, inasmuch as, there is no denial to the aspect that the appointment of the petitioner was made on a definite representation made by her that she was qualified nurse and had her registration from Bihar Nurses Registration Council. The authorities having found the petitioner’s registration as claimed by her at the time of appointment to be forged, she was also given opportunity to explain this aspect before passing of the impugned 2 order. The petitioner however had failed to give any justification as with regard to her claim of being registered as a nurse in Bihar Nurses Registration Council and therefore this Court will have no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner had actually obtained her appointment by playing fraud. As a matter of fact, the counsel for the petitioner has also not appeared today nor the petitioner has filed any rejoinder to the counter affidavit copy whereof was served on her counsel way back on 29.04.2008. Such counter affidavit contains not only full details regarding forgery committed by the petitioner in the process of her appointment by producing a forged registration certificate but is also accompanied with the documentary evidence namely the report of the Bihar Nurses Registration Council vide Annexure-A thereof. In that view of the matter it has to be held that there is no flow in the impugned order of termination of service of the petitioner. 3 Considering all these aspects, this Court does not find any merit in the application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)