Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Rohini Thakur vs Post Hp Circle on 7 February, 2024
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023
DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
(Reserved on 12:01:2024)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)
Rohini Thakur, Daughter of Sh. Balbir Singh, Wife of Sh. Ajay
Thakur, R/o 498, Block-29, Sector- III, New Shimla- 171009, H.P,
presently working as APM (LSG) Counter, Shimla GPO.
....Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Neel Kamal Sood Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ganesh
Borowalia and Ms. Seema Azad).
Versus
1. Union of India through its Secretary to the Government of
India, Ministry of Communication, Department of Post, New
Delhi-110001.
2. Chief Post Master General, Himachal Pradesh Circle, SDA
Complex, Kasumpti Shimla-9.
3. Sh. Bishan Singh, Director Postal Services, Himachal Pradesh
Circle, SDA Complex. Kasumpti Shimla-9 (deleted on
22.08.2023).
4. Sh. Vikas Negi, Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Shimla
Division, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.
5. Sh. Joginder Singh Chaudhary, Sr Post Master, Shimla, GPO,
Shimla-171001, Н.Р.
6. Sh. R.D. Pathak, Superintendent of Post Offices, Solan day
Division, Solan, Himachal Pradesh (deleted on 22.08.2023).
....Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Bharat Bhushan along with Ms. Jyotika Panesar
for R. No.1 and 2, Mr. Anshul Bansal for R. No.3 and 4).
2
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023
O R D E R (ORAL)
PER: RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMER (A)
1. Present original application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking following relief:-
(i) Annexure A-10 dated 27/07/2023 and Annexure A-12 dated 08/08/2023, may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set aside.
(ii) The respondents No. 4 & 5 may kindly be ordered to be transferred from H.P Circle to some other Circle, in the interest of law and justice.
(iii) The respondents No. 4 & 5 may kindly be ordered to be placed under suspension as has been done in the case of the applicant. in the interest of law and justice.
(iv) That entire record pertaining to the present case may kindly be summoned for the kind perusal of this Tribunal.
2. Facts of the case, as per the applicant are that she is working as APM (LSG) Counter Shimla GPO, Shimla, H.P. The applicant was declared as one of the successful candidates in written & typing tests conducted by the respondents No. 1 & 2 and was offered appointment after verification of her records and joined her services on 24.08.2009 in the Office of Solan Division Saproon, Postal Department, H.P. as Postal Assistant. The applicant remained posted there for about 4 years and was transferred to Shimla Division.
3. Thereafter she was posted in Shimla East, Sub-Office under Shimla Division in December, 2013. The applicant was 3 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 thereafter transferred to Postal Store Depot in Administrative Side and worked there for 4 years and after that she continued to work on administrative side for about 6 years. Thereafter she was posted in Shimla Division (Staff Branch) in September, 2021. The respondent No.4 joined as SSPOS Shimla Division in February, 2022. The applicant was called by respondent No.4 in his chamber after his joining and started torturing the applicant physically in his chamber. The applicant made all efforts to get out of the clutches of respondent No.4, but all in vain.
4. The applicant was promoted on 23.07.2022 as LSG Cadre.
The applicant joined her duties after promotion at GPO Shimla on 24.07.2022. The applicant got promotion only with one reason that she will be transferred to some other place and will be free from bad intentions and harassment of respondent No. 4. It may be submitted here that after joining her duties on 24.07.2022, the applicant was ordered to work in Division Office Shimla and after issuance of attachment order by respondent No. 4. The applicant started working under the office of respondent No. 4, who was her immediate boss. After the joining of her duties in GPO Shimla on 24.07.2022, the respondent No. 4 immediately called the applicant to work under him on the same date within half an hour of her joining, which was not understood 4 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 by the applicant although, it smacked off some ill-will on the part of respondent No. 4 towards the applicant.
5. The applicant while working under respondent No.4 was being tortured in connivance with respondent No. 5, who had evil eye towards the applicant. The applicant further submits that respondent No. 4 had been manoeuvring every now and then during the office hours to call upon the applicant in his chambers and tried to win-over the applicant by giving false allurance. The applicant although had been executing her duties to her best ability, but sometime the said respondents No.4 & 5, had been trying to cause impediments in the smooth working of the applicant, due to which the applicant had been facing humiliation in front of both these respondents, particularly, in the chambers of respondent No.4. The said respondent No.4 had been frequently calling the applicant to his chambers, without any rhyme and reason for quite a long time and would call upon her to stay in her chambers without any reasons. In the last week of May, 2023, the applicant was called by respondent No.5 who met the applicant, conveying the illegal method of message sent by respondent No. 4, who voluntary threatened the applicant with dire consequences and said that in case, she does not submits herself to the whims and fancies of respondent No. 4, she will be taken to task. The 5 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 applicant got astonished and was surprised after hearing such words from the mouth of respondent No.5, who was the immediate boss of the applicant, in the premises where applicant had been working at that point of time. According to applicant, said fact can be verified through CCTV footage.
6. The entire illegal actions of respondent No.4 had been continuing w.e.f. April 2022 to May 2023, which are contained in the FIR lodged by the applicant. Respondents No.4 and 5 were conniving with each other and used to send messages to each other verbally to call the applicant in chamber of respondent No.4. The respondent No. 5 was equally involved in making the applicant to submit to the wanted desires of respondent No. 4. The respondent No. 5 was also equally having evil eye upon the applicant. The copy of FIR is annexed as Annexure A-3. The applicant's husband Mr. Ajay Thakur had also sent e-mail regarding FIR to respondents No. 1 & 2 and e-mail documents are attached as Annexure A-4 & Annexure A-5. The applicant had specifically mentioned in the e-mail documents to transfer both officials i.e. respondents No. 4 & 5 so that they may not tamper or interpolate with the evidence of CCTV, as well as, win over the witnesses, who are yet to be examined by the Ld. Criminal Court/ Trial Court. The applicant did put all her best endeavours to bring the entire facts to the 6 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 knowledge of higher authorities i.e. respondents No. 1 & 2 and also requested that such persons should be transferred from Division and GPO Shimla to some other circle.
7. The applicant was surprised to know that after her lodging of FIR and sending e-mail immediately, the respondent No. 4 who is an accused in the said FIR, issued memorandum and proposed to hold enquiry against the applicant under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The copy of said memorandum is attached as Annexure A-6. The applicant was taken by surprise after reading the articles of charges framed by respondent No. 4, who made uncalled for allegations against the applicant in the article of charges, which were outcome and off shoot of the FIR lodged by the applicant against respondents No. 4 & 5. The statement of the applicant was also recorded by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, H.P, under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, in connection with FIR No. 0013 dated 04.06.2023, lodged under Sections 354-A, 506 & 34 of Indian Penal Code.
8. It has been submitted that the allegations levelled in the memo Annexure A-6, were totally false and baseless and were not as per the service record of the official/applicant. The applicant had to approach this Tribunal by way of filing an Original Application No.569/2023, titled as 'Rohini 7 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Thakur-versus Union of India & Others'. The said Original Application was listed before this Tribunal on 28.06.2023 (Annexure A-7) and the Tribunal ordered 'not to proceed with further'. The respondents after the receipt of the copy of order passed by this Tribunal, issued an office order dated 14.07.2023, whereby two memos issued against the applicant on 30.05.2023 and 09.06.2023, were dropped with immediate effect (Annexure A-8).
9. After dropping of the memos (which were challenged in Original Application No.569/2023), according to applicant, respondent No.4 in connivance with respondents No.5 and 6, lodged FIR No. 0151/2023, dated 17.07.2023, against the applicant as a counter to her FIR lodged on 04.06.2023, against respondents no. 4 and 5. According to applicant, respondents No. 3 to 6, found a new way to victimize and harass her by issuing suspension order 27.07.2023, against which the applicant has no other remedy except to file the present Original Application for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 27.07.2023 (Annexure A-10).
10. The applicant as an abundant precaution had made representation dated 27.07.2023, to the respondent no. 2 vide Annexure A-11, requesting therein to revoke the suspension order i.e. impugned Annexure A-10. The 8 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 respondent no. 3, who is hand in glove with other private respondents, particularly respondents no. 4 & 5 had intentionally and willfully, issued the suspension order dated 27.07.2023, and flouted the orders dated 28.06.2023 passed by this Tribunal, wherein this Tribunal had specifically ordered that the "department may not further proceed with Annexure A-6". The respondent no. 2 pursuant to the representation of the applicant as per Annexure A-11, sent an office order dated 09.08.2023, rejecting the representation of the applicant and refused to revoke the suspension order (Annexure A-12), hence this Original Application, for quashing and setting aside Annexure A-10 & Annexure A-12.
11. The applicant had to move to the Ld. Session Court, Solan, wherein the applicant filed bail application, which was granted and was confirmed on 09.08.2023 (Annexure A-13). The applicant submits that the allegations which were levelled against the applicant in Annexure A-6, were reproduced in verbatim in FIR lodged against the applicant. The said FIR was lodged by respondent no.6, on the instructions issued by respondent no 4. According to applicant while on one hand the charge memos were withdrawn by the respondent no. 4 and on the other hand respondent no.4 manipulated and manufactured new 9 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 nefarious design to lodge FIR against the applicant. This was to aggravate the tension and stress upon the applicant, which is fallout of the FIR lodged by the applicant against respondents no. 4 & 5, where they are accused in FIR. After the FIR lodged by the applicant, no suspension orders are issued against any of the accused persons, whereas in the FIR lodged by and on behalf of respondents no.3 to 6, the applicant has been ordered to be placed under suspension, which procedure is unknown to the law.
12. The applicant submits that there is no cause and reason to place the applicant under suspension as her appointment at the time of recruitment was totally legal and valid as her certificates were got verified by respondents from the concerned institution, who issued verification report on 25.05.2009 (Annexure A-14). The applicant also applied for supply of the original documents in the custody of respondent No.3 and 4 under RTI Act 2005 (Annexure A-
15). Respondent no.4 refused to provide the documents of the applicant on the ground that such documents cannot be provided because of provision contained in Section 8 (h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Annexure A-16). Later on, the respondent no.4 issued another letter dated 27.07.2023 to respondent no.2, stating that the records are lying in the office of respondent no.2 (Annexure A-17). The 10 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 office of respondent no.2, addressed a letter dated 02.08.2023 to respondent no.6, calling upon him to supply the documents (Annexure A-18). The applicant as abundant precaution has again applied for her original documents in the office of respondent's no. 4 & 6, vide her RTI application dated 24.07.2023 (Annexure A-19 (Colly)). The applicant is being tortured without any rhyme or reason. The applicant has also preferred an appeal to the competent authority for non-supply of documents, copy of appeal dated 04.08.2023 (Annexure A-20).
13. The applicant is being forced and pressurized every now and then by respondents No 3 to 6 to withdraw her FIR No. 0013 dated 04.06.2023. The applicant is under great stress and is not able to cope with the circumstances, which the applicant is facing at present, which is evident from the perusal of Annexure A-21 (colly). The applicant was also put to counselling in this hard time of her life. The applicant has been transferred/attached to Postal Store Depot, Kasumpti, S1 Shimla-9, by respondent no.4 vide order dated 08.06.2023 which is also apparently illegal (Annexure A-22). The applicant has submitted that by using different semantics, the said respondent No.4 is trying to torture the applicant by one or the other way, so that she makes the statement before the police regarding withdrawal of FIR. The 11 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 applicant submits that she has no intentions to withdraw the FIR. The applicant has all reasons to believe that witnesses working in the premises at Division Office and Shimla GPO, will be won-over by both respondents No. 4 & 5, as the said respondents are still posted and are working in Shimla Division and Shimla GPO. The witnesses have also been approached by respondents No.4 & 5 and there is every likelihood of witnesses being won-over by the respondents No. 4 & 5.
14. Respondent No.3 has no authority under the law to issue office order dated 27.07.2023, vide which the said respondent No. 3 has mentioned that inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, is contemplated, which is totally incorrect, the earlier charge memo issued vide Annexure A-6 stands withdrawn. The office order dated 27/07/2023 is void-ab-initio and is not sustainable in the eyes of law, as the respondent No. 4 is main accused in FIR No.0013, lodged by the Mahila Police Station, BCS, New Shimla, Shimla, H.P. and FIR lodged against applicant is also based on instructions issued by respondent no. 4, therefore, the impugned suspension order dated 27.07.2023 Annexure A- 10, deserves to be quashed and set-aside. There is CBI enquiry initiated against respondents No. 4 & 5 regarding illegalities and irregularities TF committed by both of them in 12 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 the Shimla Division. The said enquiry is still pending and is in process. There are many complaints lodged against respondents No. 4 & 5, copies whereof will be produced as and when made available.
15. Respondents No.1 and 2 have filed reply dated 11.09.2023 wherein it has been stated that the applicant applied for the post of Postal Assistant at Solan Division in response to Supdt. Post offices, Solan Division Notification dated 28.08.2008 at Saproon vide her Application Serial No. 011589 (Annexure R-1) and entered her educational qualifications in column No. 07 of the said application mentioning that she had passed her Class X and Class XII through the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS), New Delhi. On the basis of the educational qualifications certificate produced by the applicant, she was shortlisted for the further selection procedure and finally got selected and appointed as Postal Assistant under Solan Postal Division on 24.08.2009. The applicant was transferred from Solan Postal Division to Shimla Division under the provision of Rule 38 of Postal and Telegraph Postal Manual Volume IV on 20.12.2013. Further she was posted at various offices in Shimla Town and was transferred to Division Office Shimla on 18.11.2020. She worked in the different branches of Division Office. The applicant in DO Shimla worked as Office 13 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Assistant, Staff Branch w.e.f 20.09.2021. On promotion to the Lower Selection Cadre, she was transferred and posted as PA (LSG) Shimla GPO on 23.07.2022 and thereafter attached to Division Office Shimla on her request and started to work in the same branch. On 07.02.2023 while checking the Tenure register of Shimla Division for rotational transfers of Postal Assistant Cadre, it was noticed by Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Shimla Division that, the applicant had tampered with the Tenure Register of the Division Office Shimla. Prime facie, it appeared that, she had altered the date of joining in Divisional Office in respect of one Postal Assistant with the intention to increase his tenure by 1 Year at Division office Shimla. Preliminary inquiry was immediately ordered in the case on dated 08.02.2023 wherein, it was admitted by the applicant that she had made alteration in the Tenure Register. The attachment orders of the applicant were terminated forthwith and she was ordered to join at Shimla GPO w.e.f. 08.02.2023 (Annexure R-2). After the incident of tampering with official records, service records of the applicant were checked on suspicion of any discrepancies therein. In this regard, while checking the service records of the official it was revealed that, 02 sets (One from the Board of School Education Dharamshal and other from NIOS) of attested copies of Certificates of 14 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Class X (Annexure R-3) and Class XII (Annexure-4) were found present in Service Book and Personal File respectively of the applicant. Based on suspicion both the sets were then checked thoroughly and sent for verification to the concerned board of the School Educations. Annexure R-3 and R-4 appear to have been attested by Sh Balbir Singh Sen father of the applicant. In the photocopies of educational certificates attached in the service book part-II of the applicant for Class-10th (Annexure R-5) and Class- 12th (Annexure R-6) (both issued by HP Board of School Education) Roll Number was not appearing on both the photocopies. Moreover, both the certificates were issued in the name of "Rekha" for Class X dated 03.06.2000 passed from Govt. Girls High School, Theog and Class XII dated 30.05.2002 passed from Arya Girls Sr. Sec School Shimla purportedly issued by Secretary, HP Board of School Education, Dharamshala. Photocopy of an affidavit (Annexure R-7) issued by Notary Public Delhi dated 20.12.2004 for change of name from "Rekha Sen" to "Rohini Thakur" was found attached in the service book along with a photocopy of notification in Punjab Kesari, Delhi Edition of dated 04.01.2005 (Annexure R-8). Since, no Roll No. was appearing on the photocopies of the certificates, of 10th and 12th class issued by the HP Board of School Education, 15 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 these educational certificates were sent for verification to the concerned Schools mentioned in the photocopies of the certificates vide Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Shimla Division Letter dated 11.02.2023 (Annexure R-9) addressed to Principal Govt Girls Senior Secondary School Theog and letter dated 11.02.2023 (Annexure R-10) addressed to the Principal Arya Girls Sr Secondary School Shimla. Both the certificates were got verified from the concerned Schools, i.e. from Principal Govt. Girls Senior Secondary School of 7 Excellence, Theog for Class X and from Principal Arya Girls Senior Secondary School Shimla Lower Bazaar Shimla for Class XII. On 13.02.2023 verification of Class X Certificate was received from Principal, GGSSS Theog, Shimla (Annexure R-11) revealing that, "Ms. Rekha D/o Balbir Singh was neither a student of their institution for the period mentioned in the certificate, nor her name was found in the gazette issued by H.P Board of School Education Dharamshala showing the result for the year 2000.". That on 15.02.2023 verification of Class XII Certificate purportedly issued by HP Board of School Education was received from Arya Girls Senior Secondary School, Shimla (Annexure R-12) mentioning that, "no records of Smt Rekha D/o Balbir Singh Sain was found in the Result register of the school." On 22.02.2023 the case file was submitted to higher authorities 16 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 i.e., O/o Chief Postmaster General, H.P Circle, Shimla for their kind information and further directions into the matter. Meanwhile, with respect to certificates of Class X and Class XII issued by NIOS, letter for verification of the genuineness of the certificates were sent to Regional Director NIOS Chandigarh, Dharamshala, and Noida on 27.02.2023 and 01.03.2023 respectively. Subsequent reminders to NIOS authorities were also issued on dated 20.04.2023. On 24.04.2023, the verification report on the genuineness of Class X and Class XII certificates were received from Sh. Naipal Singh, Officer Incharge (M&M) National Institution of Open Schooling (NIOS), Noida vide their letter dated 18.04.2023 (Annexure R-13) revealing that the said candidate documents for verification are not genuine and seems to be fake." Moreover, the genuineness of the Class X and Class XII certificates issued by NIOS were also got checked from the Central Database of the official Website of NIOS i.e., www.results.nios.ac.in through which it was revealed that the Certificate attached by the applicant for Class XII Bearing Roll No. 06001033254 was in the name of Sh. Lokinder Kumar for the year 2004 (Annexure R-14) instead of Ms. Rohini Thakur as was claimed by the applicant. Certificate for Class X bearing Roll No. 062432540 was also got verified through the NIOS Website with results 17 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 that "Sorry no result found with Roll Number 062432540"
(Annexure R-15). Since, the applicant is in LSG Cadre and the disciplinary/appointing authority in respect to LSG Cadre is Director Postal Services, H.P Circle, hence, the matter was sent to Chief Postmaster General H.P Circle office vide SSPOs Shimla Division letter No SSPOs/Con/2023 dated 24.04.2023 (Copy enclosed as Annexure R-16) alongwith the verification report received from NIOS Authorities. It was further directed by Circle office vide their letter dated 18.05.2023 (Annexure R-17) to initiate disciplinary action against applicant. In compliance to O/o Chief Postmaster General, H.P Circle, Shimla directions, SSPOs Shimla Division, Respondent No 4 issued notice to the applicant vide this office letter dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure R-18) to produce her original educational certificates of Matriculation, 10+2 and graduation within three days at the O/o Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Shimla Division. In reply to notice, the applicant stated vide her explanation dated 29.05.2023 (Annexure R-19) that, she had produced her certificates to the accountant at Postal Stores Depot (PSD) Shimla during her tenure as PA at PSD Shimla. The matter was taken up with Supdt. Postal Stores Depot HP Circle Kasumpti vide this office letter dated 29.05.2023, in reply to which Supdt. PSD has intimated this office vide their letter No. E- 4/Service 18 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Book/2013-14 dated 31.05.2023 (Annexure R-20) that, "Neither original documents/certificates of said official are available in the records of PSD nor there is any evidence that such documents were ever given by said Smt. Rohini Thakur for digitization". On 30.05.2023 and in compliance to Circle office directions in the record tampering case of tenure register, the applicant was served with a Chargesheet under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965. On 02.06.2023 husband of the applicant came to Division office Shimla requesting to meet with Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Shimla Division. He requested to halt the disciplinary proceedings against his wife Smt. Rohini Thakur APM, Lower Selection Grade (LSG), Shimla GPO (Applicant of the OA) and take a lenient view for her misconduct. Accountant, Division office and OA Staff Branch were also present in the chamber during this meeting. The applicant was aware of the fact that, the educational qualification certificates submitted by her for recruitment to the post of Postal Assistant at Solan Postal Division were not genuine, SSPOs Shimla Division issued notice to the applicant vide letter dated 23.05.2023 and the applicant came to know that Department is holding an inquiry into her fake documents case. Hence, to manipulate the proceedings, she lodged FIR No 0004 dated 04.06.2023 at Mahila Police Station at BCS, Shimla 19 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 against the respondent No. 4 & 5. No complaint was made to Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) by the applicant. Also applicant has never given any complaint to superior authorities i.e. Chief Postmaster General, HP Postal Circle and Director Postal Services, HP Postal Circle. Moreover, the Chief Postmaster General, head of the Circle during the period was a lady officer headquartered at Shimla and the applicant could have approached to her any time. As per directions received from higher authorities vide Circle office letter dated 18.05.2023, the applicant was issued with Memorandum vide Memo dated 09.06.2023 (Annexure R-
21) for allegedly submission of Fake Documents.
Genuineness of the certificates were already got verified by Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Shimla Division from the concerned Board/Schools in the month of February and March, 2023. The case regarding obtaining Govt. service on the basis of fake educational certificate was reported to Police Station, Thana Sadar Shimla and complaint was lodged vide GD No- 092 dated 15.06.2023 and since, the recruitment of the applicant was made at Solan Postal Division in the year 2008- 2009, hence, the Police Authorities transferred the case to District Solan wherein FIR No-151/2023 dated 17.07.2023 (Annexure R-22) has been lodged against the applicant for allegedly submitting fake 20 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 documents during her recruitment as PA at Solan Postal Division. Since the FIR was lodged by the applicant against the Respondent No 4 & 5 on 04.06.2023 and chargesheet was issued on 09.06.2023 by SSPOs Shimla Division keeping in view the sequence of the events and principle of natural justice and to Honour the CAT order dated in which the disciplinary proceedings were stayed, the charge sheets under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 issued vide SSPOs Memo No. SSP/Con/2023 dated 30.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 were dropped by SSPOS Shimla Division on the directions issued by CPMG H.P Circle letter No APMG/CON/Shimla Division/2023 dated 14.07.2023 (Annexure R-23). The applicant is well aware of the facts that, her educational documents submitted by herself during her recruitment in the year 2008-2009 are fake and her father Sh. Balbir Singh Sen was holding charge of Solan Postal Division during her recruitment process who in turn facilitated the verification process of her fake documents which has also been mentioned in Thana Sadar GD No 092 dated 15.06.2023 (Annexure R-24). Based on the above facts a detailed inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rule, 1965 is required to be contemplated. In the detailed inquiry contemplated allegations of securing the government service by means of production of fake educational certificates, the penalty likely 21 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 to be imposed upon will be either removal/ dismissal from service. Therefore, as per guiding principal contained in Government of India Instructions No 1(iv) of Rule 10 of CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965. "Where allegation have been made against the Govt servant and preliminary inquiry has revealed that prima facie case is made out which would justify his prosecution or is being proceeded against in departmental proceedings, and where the proceedings are likely to end in his conviction and for dismissal, removal or compulsorily retirement from the service". The government servant is justified to be placed under suspension. It has been submitted that FIR against respondents No.4 and 5 was lodged by the applicant in a revengeful manner to derail the inquiry process.
16. Respondent No.4 has filed a separate reply dated 18.09.2023. It has been stated therein that the Applicant applied for the post of Postal Assistant at Solan Division in response to Supdt. Post offices, Solan Division Notification No. B-2/33 dated 28.08.2008 at Saproon vide Application Serial No. 011589. The Applicant entered her educational qualifications in column No. 07 of the said application as Class X and Class XII pass through the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) New Delhi. On the basis of the educational qualifications certificate produced by the 22 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Applicant, she was shortlisted for further selection procedure. Thereafter, the Applicant finally got selected and appointed as Postal Assistant under Solan Postal Division on 24.08.2009. The Applicant was transferred from Solan Postal Division to Shimla Postal Division on 20.12.2013 as per the provisions of Rule 38 of the Postal Manual Volume IV, Further, she was posted at various offices in Shimla Town and was transferred to Division Office Shimla on 18.11.2020. She worked in the different branches of the Division Office. The Applicant worked as Office Assistant, Staff Branch w.e.f 20.09.2021 in Division Office Shimla. On promotion to the Lower Selection Cadre, she was transferred and posted as PA (LSG) Shimla GPO on 23.07.2022 and thereafter attached to Division Office Shimla on her request and started to work in the same Branch. On 07.02.2023, while checking the Tenure Register of Shimla Division for rotational transfers of Postal Assistant Cadre, it was noticed by Respondent No. 4 that the Applicant had tampered with the Tenure Register of Division Office Shimla. Prime facie, it appeared that the Applicant had altered the date of joining in Divisional Office Shimla in respect of Sh. Mohammad Hussain. Postal Assistant, with the intention to increase his tenure by One Year at Division Office Shimla. Preliminary inquiry was immediately ordered in the case on 08.02.2023; 23
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 wherein, it was admitted by the Applicant that she had made alteration in the Tenure Register. The attachment orders of the Applicant were terminated forthwith by Respondent No.4 and she was ordered to join at Shimla GPO w.e.f. 08.02.2023 vide Memo dated 08.02.2023. After the incident of tampering with official records surfaced, the service records of the Applicant were checked on suspicion of any discrepancies therein. In this regard, while checking the service records of the Applicant, the following 02 sets of educational certificates were found present in the Service Book and Personal File of the Applicant.
(a) Class X Secondary School Examination Certificate issued by the National Institute of Open Schooling (Annexure R-3).
(b) Class XII Senior Secondary School Examination Certificate issued by the National Institute of Open Schooling (Annexure R-4).
(c) Class X Secondary School Examination Certificate issued by the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education, Dharamshala (Annexure R-5).
(d) Class XII Senior Secondary School Examination Certificate issued by the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education, Dharamshala (Annexure R-6).
Based on suspicion, both the sets were then thoroughly checked and sent for verification to the concerned Board of School Education. Notably, no Roll Number was found on both the educational certificates (Annexure R-5 & R-6) issued by the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education, Dharamshala. On 13.02.2023, verification of Class X Certificate of the applicant was 24 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 received from the Principal, GGSSS Theog, Shimla, revealing therein that "Ms. Rekha D/o Balbir Singh was neither a student of their institution for the period mentioned in the certificate, nor her name was found in the gazette issued by H.P Board of School Education Dharamshala showing the result for the year 2000." (Annexure R-11). Moreover, the verification of Class XII Certificate of the applicant, purportedly issued by HP Board of School Education, was received from Arya Girls Senior Secondary School, Shimla on 15.02.2023 and it surfaced that "no records of Smt Rekha D/o Balbir Singh Sain was found in the Result register of the school." (Annexure R-12). On 22.02.2023, the Applicant's case file was submitted to the higher authority i.e. Respondent No.2 for his kind information and further directions into the matter. Meanwhile, letter seeking verification of the genuineness of the Class X and Class XII educational certificates of the Applicant (Annexure R-3 & R-4), purportedly issued by NIOS, were sent to Regional Director NIOS Chandigarh, Dharamshala, and Noida on 27.02.2023 and 01.03.2023 respectively. Subsequent reminders to NIOS authorities were also issued on 20.04.2023. On 24.04.2023, the verification report on the genuineness of Class X and Class XII certificates of the Applicant (Annexure R-3 & R-4) was received from Sh. Naipal Singh, Officer Incharge (M & M) National Institution of Open Schooling (NIOS), Noida vide Letter No. F.7-104/2023/NIOS/EVAL/M&M/Fake 25 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Cert.195 dated 18.04.2023 revealing that "the said candidate documents for verification are not genuine and seems to be fake." (Annexure R-13). Moreover, the genuineness of the Class X and Class XII certificates issued by NIOS (Annexure R-3 & R-4) were also checked from the Central Database of the official Website of NIOS i.e., www.results.nios.ac.in through which it was revealed that the Certificate attached by the Applicant for Class XII Bearing Roll No.06001033254 was in the name of Sh. Lokinder Kumar for the year 2004, instead of Ms. Rohini Thakur as was claimed by the Applicant. A copy of the Online verification of Class XII certificate of the Applicant is Annexure R-14. Even the Certificate for Applicant's Class X bearing Roll No. 062432540 was verified through the NIOS Website with results that "Sorry no result found with Roll Number 062432540". A copy of the Online verification of Class X certificate of the Applicant is being annexed herewith as Annexure R-15. Since the Applicant belongs to LSG Cadre and the Disciplinary/Appointing Authority in respect to LSG Cadre is Director, Postal Services, H.P Circle, hence, the matter was sent to Respondent No. 2 vide SSPOs Shimla Division Letter No SSPOs/Con/2023 dated 24.04.2023, along with the verification report received from NIOS Authorities (Annexure R-
16). In pursuance of the aforesaid Letters dated 22.02.2023, 13.03.2023 and 24.04.2023, the Assistant Postmaster General, H.P. Circle directed Respondent No. 3 vide Letter dated 26 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 18.05.2023 to initiate disciplinary action against the Applicant (Annexure R-17). In compliance of the directions issued by the O/o Chief Postmaster General, H.P Circle vide Letter dated 18.05.2023 (Annexure R-17), Respondent No 4 issued notice to the Applicant vide office letter dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure R-
18), to produce her original educational certificates of Matriculation, 10+2 and graduation within three days. In reply to notice dated 23.05.2023, the Applicant inter-alia stated vide her explanation dated 29.05.2023 that she had produced her certificates to the accountant at Postal Stores Depot (PSD) Shimla during her tenure as PA at PSD Shimla (Annexure R-19). Thereafter, the matter was taken up with the Supdt. Postal Stores Depot, HP Circle, Kasumpti, vide Office Letter dated 29.05.2023, in reply to which the Supdt. PSD has intimated vide Letter dated 31.05.2023 that "Neither original documents/certificates of said official are available in the records of PSD, nor there is any evidence that such documents were ever given by said Smt. Rohini Thakur for digitization" (Annexure R-
20). On 30.05.2023 and in compliance to Circle office directions in the record tampering case of tenure register, the Applicant was served with a Charge-sheet under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965. on 02.06.2023, the Applicant's husband came to Division Office Shimla requesting to meet Respondent No. 4. He requested to halt the disciplinary proceedings against his wife i.e. the 27 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Applicant and take a lenient view for her misconduct. The Accountant, Division Office, and OA, Staff Branch, were also present in the chamber during this meeting.
17. The Applicant was aware of the fact that the educational qualification certificates submitted by her for recruitment to the post of Postal Assistant at Solan Postal Division were not genuine. It was only after Respondent No. 4 issued notice to the applicant vide Letter dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure R-18), the applicant came to know that the Department is holding an inquiry into her fake documents case. Hence, to disrupt the inquiry process and to manipulate the proceedings, the applicant lodged FIR No.0013 dated 04.06.2023 (Annexure A-3) at Mahila Police Station at BCS Shimla against Respondents No. 4 & 5. No complaint regarding un sexual harassment was made to the Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) by the Applicant before lodging an FIR. Further, the applicant never even made such complaint to the Superior Authorities i.e. Respondent No. 2 and Director Postal Services, HP Postal Circle. Notably, the Chief Postmaster General, Head of the Circle, during the period under scrutiny was a lady officer and the applicant could have approached her any time hence the FIR is an after-thought just in order to disrupt the inquiry process initiated against the Applicant under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. As per 28 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 directions received from Higher Authorities vide Circle Office Letter dated 18.05.2023, the applicant was issued Memorandum dated 09.06.2023 for allegedly submitting Fake Documents (Annexure R-21). The information regarding obtaining government service on the basis of fake educational certificate was reported to Police Station, Thana Sadar, Shimla, and complaint was lodged vide GD No.092 dated 15.06.2023 (Annexure R-22). Since the recruitment of the Applicant was made at Solan Postal Division in the year 2008-2009, hence, the Police Authorities transferred the case to District Solan and accordingly FIR No. 0151/2023 dated 17.07.2023 was lodged against the applicant for allegedly submitting fake documents during her recruitment as Postal Assistant at Solan Postal Division in the year 2008- 2009 (Annexure R-23). Since FIR No. 0013/2023 dated 04.06.2023 (Annexure A-3) was lodged by the applicant against Respondents No. 4 & 5 and Memorandum dated 09.06.2023 (Annexure R-21) was issued to the Applicant by Respondent No. 4, therefore, keeping in view the sequence of the events, principles of natural justice and in order to have a fair inquiry and to avoid any element of bias in the inquiry against the applicant, along with the directions passed by this Tribunal vide Order dated 28.06.2023 in O.A. No. 569/2023 titled "Rohini Thakur Vs UOI & Ors." whereby 29 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 the Respondent Department was directed not to proceed further with Memorandum dated 09.06.2023 (Annexure R-
21), the Memorandums under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 issued vide SSPOs Memo No. SSP/Con/2023 dated 30.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 were dropped by SSPOs Shimla Division on technical grounds without any prejudice to any action for issue of fresh chargesheet in the matter on the directions issued by CPMG H.P. Circle vide Letter dated 14.07.2023 (Annexure R-24). Applicant is well aware of the fact that the educational documents submitted by her during her recruitment in the year 2008-2009 are fake. Notably, the Applicant's father, Sh. Balbir Singh Sen, was holding the charge of Solan Postal Division during her recruitment process in the year 2008-2009, who in turn facilitated the verification process of her fake documents. Applicant for selection/recruitment as Postal Assistant in the Department of Posts were prima-facie found to be fake; therefore, a detailed inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rule, 1965 is contemplated against the Applicant for allegedly securing government service by means of production of fake educational certificates. If the aforesaid charges are proved against the Applicant, the penalty likely to be imposed upon her is removal/dismissal from service. Thus, keeping in view the provisions of Rule 10 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, the 30 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 Director, Postal Services, is justified in placing the Applicant under suspension vide Memo dated 27.07.2023 (Annexure A-10).
18. Respondent No.5 has also filed a separate reply dated 18.09.2023 reiterating the stand taken by respondents No.1, 2 and 4.
19. The applicant has filed rejoinder to reply of respondents No.1, 2, 4 and 5.
20. We have perused facts on record and find the narrative of the applicant is based on behaviour towards her, of respondents No.4 and 5, of sexual harassment especially of respondent No.4. However, she did not deem it fit to approach ICC as mentioned in FIR on the grounds that respondents No.4 and 5 may put pressure on her. Nor did she mett then CPMG Shimla circle, a senior lady officer about this behaviour. Instead claims as per FIR that her husband meet respondent No.4 and subsequently sent email to seniors respondent No.1 and 2 to transfer respondents. The sequence of events as narrated by the applicant aim primarily to establish unethical behaviour of respondent No.4 and in response she filed an FIR against him. Her claim is that chargesheet/suspension/FIR by respondents against her smacks of vendetta doesn't appear to be based on 31 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 substantive grounds. Any way that is a separate cause of action as per extant laws.
21. We have perused replies of respondents according to which she had tampered with tenure records relating to an employee named Mohammad Hussain. She admitted doing so, which in turn triggered verification of her records. Discrepancy was found in her educational records which were got verified by respondents and found to be fake, hence departmental action of suspension and of inquiry was initiated, she was given show cause on 9.6.2023 and FIR on 17.07.2023 was also then filed.
22. We find that in response to memo dated 27.07.2023 (Annexure A-10) applicant sent representation Annexure A- 11 to CPMG, Shimla in which she demanded suspension of respondents No and 5 based on her FIR and interim order of CAT and claims that two emails were sent to him but no action taken. Who sent when sent why sent is not mentioned in representation sent presumably by her husband as mentioned in her O.A. We find the representation has been replied by CPMG in detail as per Annexure A-12.
23. In the FIR lodged by the respondents, applicant has been given bail by session judge Solan on 9.6.2023 (Annexure A- 32
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023
13) and as mentioned in order bail is not a reflection of merits of the case till disposal of petition.
24. We have also perused rejoinder dated 18.10.2023 filed by the applicant wherein it has been claimed in reply to respondents No.1 and 2 as charge memos dated 30.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 have been withdrawn on 14.07.2023 (A-8) and dropped so no departmental action is pending as on date on the basis of which suspension order Annexure A-10 was issued. So Annexure A-10 dated 27.07.2023 should be quashed and set aside.
25. We have perused short rejoinder of the applicant filed against respondent No.4 (Now respondent No.3-Vikas Negi) on 20.10.2023. According to applicant no original documents of the applicant have been collected by respondents and claim of forged document is not correct and Annexure A-10 needs to be quashed. We have also perused rejoinder filed against reply of respondent No.5 (Now respondent No.4- Joginder Singh).
26. The applicant's counsel has argued that just because inquiry was contemplated she cannot be placed under suspension and has filed various case laws including Supreme Court case judgment dated 07.12.1971 titled P.R. Nayak vs. UOI with reference to definition of contemplation as also Sarup Kumar vs. State of H.P. & Ors. in CWP No.262 of 2024. 33
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 None of these cases are applicable as the facts are totally different. In this case based on preliminary inquiry there is material on record regarding fake documents. We have also perused decision dated 14.12.2023 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Dinesh Singh & Another (SLP (C) No.21335 of 2022) has held that as on the date of consideration, disciplinary action was contemplated against writ petitioner Dinesh Singh and therefore, he was rightly held to be ineligible for selection of his name in Register A-1. In the similar analogy since disciplinary action for suspension has been contemplated under CCS CCA rules on the date suspension order A-10 has been issued, it cannot be considered wrong.
27. Tribunals interim order dated 28.06.2023 was with reference to A-6 i.e. the first charge sheet which was dropped on 14.07.2023. So we find no violation of order dated 28.06.2023. The second charge sheet dated 27.07.2023 (Annexure A-10) is a subsequent event giving rise to fresh cause of action for which this OA No.760/2023 has been filed. A-10 has been issued as per Rule 10 (1)(a) of CCS CCA Rules based on certain facts emerging out of an preliminary fact finding inquiry based on which disciplinary proceedings are contemplated. It has been issued by competent authority. So we find no infirmity in the same 34 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 and Annexure A-13 has made the reasons for same clear and we agree with it. The applicant's claim that no original documents were asked for is a specious plea in light of what is stated supra. The inquiry will provide her a chance to produce original documents in her defence and we feel inquiry in the circumstances discussed above must be taken to its logical end.
28. The claim that Annexure A-6 has been dropped and so no ground now exists for fresh inquiry is again very misleading. We find that earlier charge sheet has been dropped on technical grounds only and not on merit. The Tribunal order had also said not to proceed with A-6 and with its dropping, the action is over with regard to A-6 only. However, the information gathered is on record and needs further verifications since a preliminary inquiry was conducted and certificates verified and found to be fake based on which appointment has been secured. It is indeed a serious issue. It is based on these facts that fresh charge sheet (Annexure A-10) has been issued and as per suspension rules if inquiry is contemplated, suspension is possible and valid.
29. Nowhere in her averment has applicant claimed explicitly the contentions of respondents regarding fake certificates are not correct nor explained how two certificates were in her personal file except saying original documents were not called for. This contention of applicant is also not correct as 35 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.768/2023 seen from Annexure R-18 asking her to provide original certificates. Her focus throughout is on building sexual harassment narrative and appears an attempt to divert attention from the fake certificates.
30. Hence in light of detailed discussion above, Annexure A-10 is not quashed. However in order to maintain objectivity and ensure natural justice, as per relief sought the competent authority is directed that applicant and respondents No.3 and 4 should not be posted in same station, in light of personal allegations contained in FIR by applicant, till inquiry as per Annexure A-10 is completed. In the light of above, O.A. is partly allowed. The inquiry should be completed expeditiously within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order to costs.
(RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI) (RAMESH SINGH THAKUR) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J) /kr/