Madhya Pradesh High Court
Santosh Kumar Raikwar vs High Court Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 August, 2019
Jabalpur, Dated : 20.08.2019
Shri D.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Himanshu Mishra, learned G.A. for respondents/State.
Per: Shri Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.:
The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging legality and validity of the order dated 05.07.2019 passed by the respondent No.2 whereby the services of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Grade III has been terminated on the ground that on verification, his PGDCA diploma certificate was found to be illegal and invalid.
2. The facts of the case in short are that an advertisement was issued for recruitment to the post of Stenographer Grade-III (District Court), Steno-Typist and Assistant Grade-III in year 2017. The petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Grade-III and appeared in the said examination of year 2017 conducted for recruitment to the aforesaid post. The petitioner was asked to appear before the respondent No.2 along with original certificates and documents. He was appointed on the post of Assistant Grade-III temporarily on probation for a period of two years subject to the conditions enumerated in the appointment order. In condition No. 2 of the appointment order, it was specifically mentioned that the certificates relating to educational and other qualifications if found to be invalid on verification from the concerned institution, the services of the employees shall be liable to be terminated and other legal actions shall also be taken in accordance with law. The petitioner had filed PGDCA diploma certificate issued by Eastern Institute for Intergrated Learning in Management (EIILM) University, Jorethang, Sikkim. He had done the said diploma course through some off campus centre or study centre of the said University situated at Naogaon, District-Chhatarpur as a distance course. The said certificate was sent for verification to the University Grant Commission (UGC). The UGC communicated vide letter dated 12.04.2019 to the respondent no.2 that the said University was never granted permission by the Commission for off campus centre or study centre. It was also informed that the said EIILM University, Sikkim had also been closed from April, 2015 and the same had also been deleted from the list of UGC. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when he had done the diploma, the said certificate was valid as he had obtained the said diploma certificate through off campus centre, Naogaon, District-Chhatarpur as a distance course.
3. Upon perusal of the communication dated 12.04.2019 of University Grant Commission, we find that the said EIILM University was never granted permission for off campus centre or study centre right from its inception, thus, the diploma certificate obtained by the petitioner from the said University from off campus centre was illegal and invalid right from the establishment of the said University. The said University was never permitted for such courses under the Regulations of UGC (Establishment of and Maintenance of Standards in Private Univerisities) Regulations, 2003.
4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is passed without any show cause notice. In the present case, it is not disputed that the petitioner had obtained the diploma certificate from the University which was not permitted for off campus centre or study, therefore, the petitioner has no valid diploma certificate recognised by UGC as required by the GAD circular dated 18.08.2015 for the appointment on the post of Assistant Grade-III, therefore the issuance of a notice before passing the impugned order would have been useless formality as the appointment of the petitioner has been found to be illegal and void on verification of his diploma certificate in terms of condition No.2 of the appointment order.
5. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any illegality in the order impugned warranting any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
(R. S. Jha) (Vijay Kumar Shukla)
Acting Chief Justice Judge
anu
Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA
SHARMA
Date: 2019.08.26 14:47:44
+05'30'