IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.12060 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 MRS. RAJ KUMARI ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1. This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 23.10.2009 (Annexure P-5). Vide order (Annexure P- 5), the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled and her services as Teaching Fellow have been terminated, in view of the fact that the experience certificates furnished by the petitioner have been found to be forged and bogus. 2. The stand of the respondents is that in view of earlier orders of this Court (in CWP No.16434 of 2009 decided on 29.10.2009 and CWP No.16683 of 2009 decided on 3.11.2009), a Committee was again Civil Writ Petition No.12060 of 2010 2 constituted to consider each case. On reconsideration of the issue, the entire matter has been addressed again. 3. In the case of the petitioner, the entire evidence has been considered. Opportunity of hearing was also given to the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the experience certificates of the petitioner have been found to be bogus. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has referred to the report of the Committee, in extenso. The report, in vernacular, is taken on record. 5. On consideration of the report, I find that the experience certificates furnished by the petitioner have been found to be forged/bogus, for reasons assigned by the Committee. There being a basis indicated for terming the experience certificates as fabricated/bogus, I find that adjudication in writ jurisdiction is not possible. While the petitioner asserts that the experience certificates are genuine, the respondents have given reasons contained in the report of the Committee that the certificates are fabricated and bogus. There being disputed questions of fact, the issue cannot be addressed, without taking evidence. 6. This petition is, accordingly, disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternate remedy. September 1, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?