Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sk. Amirul Islam vs State Of West Bengal & Others on 5 December, 2019
Author: Rajasekhar Mantha
Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha
1
05-12-2019
sl. 57
pk
ct-14 W. P. No. 10844 (W) of 2019
Sk. Amirul Islam
Vs.
State of West Bengal & others
Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya,
Mr. N. Haque,
Mr. S. Shah
...for the petitioner.
Sk. Md. Galib,
Mr. S. Nag
... for the State.
Mr. Subhrangshu Panda,
Mr. A. S. Chatterjee
... for the private respondent.
A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 6th June, 2018 passed in W. P. No. 6432(W) of 2018 found that the writ petitioner as per school record was stated to have passed Class VII in 1978 and was promoted to Class VIII. In the year 1978 itself he produced a certificate that he has passed Class VIII and was promoted to Class IX. The certificate was issued by the then headmaster of the school whose handwriting and genuineness has been certified by the Government Examiner of question document and forwarded by the C. I. D., West Bengal to this Court.
Ex facie, it appears to this Court that the certificate was procured fraudulently by the writ petitioner since the same is 2 completely contradictory not only by the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench but also from the documents procured under R. T. I. Act from the school concerned by the private respondent.
The progress report register of the school originally recorded 19 students in one single hand-writing. The 20th name was that of the writ petitioner which is in a completely different hand-writing. The second document also showing the writ petitioner as the last student in the progress report is dated 22.12.2018 against the serial no. 20. The hand-writing of the person who recorded the students 1 to 19 is completely different from the hand-writing of the person who entered the name of the petitioner against the item no. 20. The same is available at page 62 of the affidavit-in- opposition.
The petitioner has practised fraud and has obtained the aforesaid certificate indicating that he has passed the Class VIII examination albeit signed by the headmaster of the school.
The entry of the petitioner's name in the progress report of the school for the year 1978 is a forgery and is fictitious. The petitioner therefore did not have minimum qualification of Class VIII for the Group D post in the Madrasah concerned.
The appointment and approval of the petitioner has been validly cancelled.
3
The respondent no. 6 shall continue in the school as the regular Group D staff.
This Court, however, in the interest of justice does not pass any orders towards recovery of any salaries and wages that the writ petitioner has obtained since he has in fact performed work in a school as a staff.
The impugned order dated 26th November, 2018 passed by the Director of Madrasah Education is upheld.
Hence, the instant writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all formalities.
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)