Jharkhand High Court
Yogendra Nath Dangi vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 2 August, 2017
Author: Pramath Patnaik
Bench: Pramath Patnaik
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 887 of 2012
Yogendra Nath Dangi, Son of Late Bhekhlal Mahto, resident of village-
Pathalgadda, Police Station Pathalgadda, District-Chatra (was working as
Assistnat Teacher (Incharge H.M.), Upgraded Middle School, Hesatu, Post
Office-Pratappur, District-Chatra (Jharkhand). .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Secretary, Human Resource Development, Department, Government of
Jharkhand, Telephone Bhawan, Post Office & Police Station- Dhurwa, District
Ranchi (Jharkhand).
3. Director, Primary Education, Human Resource Development Department,
Government of Jharkhand, Telephone Bhawan, Post Office & Police Station-
Dhurwa, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).
4. Regional Deputy Director of Education, Human Resource Development
Department, Government of Jharkhand.
5. Deputy Commissioner, Chatra (Jharkhand).
6. District Education Officer, Chatra (Jharkhand).
7. Devi Dayal Mandal, son of not known to the petitioner, presently working as
District Superintendent of Education, Chatra (Jharkhand).
8. Manoj Kumar, son of - not known to the petitioner, resident of village-
Kishanpur, Post Office & Police Station-Chatra, District-Chatra, presently
working as-Head Clerk, Office of District Superintendent of Education, Chatra
(Jharkhand).
9. Bihar School Examination Board, Patna, through its Secretary, Bihar School
Examination Board, P.O., P.S. & District-Patna (Bihar).
10. Bihar Sanskrit Education Board, Bihar, Patna, through its Secretary, Bihar
Sanskrit Education Board, P.O., P.S. & District-Patna (Bihar).
11. Chhotanagpur Primary Teacher's Training College, Near G.E.L. Church,
Post Office-G.P.O., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand).
...... Respondent
---
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMATH PATNAIK
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate,
2
M/s R. K. Sinha & Amrita Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondents : Mr. Binod Singh, S.C.(L&C)
For the Respondent no.11 : Dr. Amita Srivastava, Advocate
Niraj Kumar, Advocate
-----
18/ 02/08/2017
Per Pramath Patnaik, J.
In the aforesaid writ application, the petitioner has interalia prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No.1464 dated 13.12.2011 passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra vide Annexure-5 pertaining to termination of the petitioner and the petitioner has further prayed for release the salary after reinstatement in services from October, 2011 till the date of reinstatement.
2. The brief facts as depicted in the writ petition is that in pursuance to advertisement published in newspaper for appointment of Teachers in Primary Schools of Government of Jharkhand, the petitioner applied for the said posts and vide memo dated 24.12.2003, he was appointed under the signature of the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra alongwith other similarly situated Teachers. During time of appointment, no verification of the certificate was done. After lapse of three years, in the year 2006, the petitioner was asked to produce the marks sheet in original which was produced before the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra. The same was also verified from Bihar School Examination Board. The salary of the petitioner was stopped for the time being thereafter, it was released after the verification of the certificate. It has been averred in the writ application that in the year 2011, the petitioner was asked to pay illegal gratification by respondent no.8 and the petitioner expressed his inability to pay. Thereafter, a letter dated 17.09.2011 was issued to the petitioner whereby the testimonial 3 submitted by the petitioner were found to be suspicious and the salary of the petitioner got stopped vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. It is stated that neither any enquiry was conducted nor any show cause was issued to the effect that if any manipulation or forgery had been committed by the petitioner. It has further been submitted in the writ application, the authorities of the Chhotanagpur Primary Teachers' College, Ranchi from where the petitioner has completed the Primary Teachers' course was not examined nor any inquiry was conducted, as to whether mark sheet issued by the Bihar School Examination Board through the Chhotanagpur Primary Teachers' College, Ranchi showing total marks 938 were correct or not? Without making endeavour for conducting an inquiry to find out the truth, the impugned order of termination dated 13.12.2011, by the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra, was issued vide Annexure-5 to the writ petition. From the termination order, it transpires that another mark sheet has been issued to the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra wherein the marks obtained by the petitioner has been shown 953 i.e. 15 more marks obtained in comparison to earlier marks sheet. This created doubt in the mind of the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra. Being aggrieved by the order, the petitioner submitted appeal/representation before the Director, Primary Education, Government of Jharkhand on 18.01.2012 vide Annexure- 7 but the said representation has failed to evoke any response from the respondents. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 13.12.2011 vide Annexure-5, the petitioner left with no other alternative remedy, has knocked the doors of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances. 4
3. Mr. R. S. P. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner during course of hearing has vehemently submitted that the impugned order of termination has been issued without holding any inquiry and without issuance of any show cause, therefore, the impugned order is not legally sustainable. Learned senior counsel further submits that the action of the respondent in terminating the petitioner from the services vide Annexure-5 amounts to arbitrary exercise of power, in breach of principle of natural justice, which is violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
4. Controverting the averments made in the writ application, counter- affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents. In the counter-affidavit, it has been submitted that in the light of the decision taken in the meeting dated 20.07.2011 of the District Education Establishment Committee, Chatra, the petitioner submitted the original certificates, Nine in numbers, as per the Annexure-K to the counter-affidavit and the said certificates were placed before the District Establishment Committee, Chatra meeting dated 28.11.2011 and and the matter was discussed. It was found that the mark sheets obtained by the petitioner did not match in the original tabulation register. It was also found that the mark sheet has been issued vide letter dated 18.04.1990 and the admit card showed that the examination would be held on 24.01.1991. Therefore, it was clear that the mark sheets of the petitioner was issued before the examination was conducted. Therefore, it was decided to terminate the petitioner from services as per Annexure-L Series to the counter-affidavit.
5. A counter-affidavit has also been filed by the respondent no.11 wherein it has been submitted that the petitioner has not committed any error or offence regarding these two marks sheets showing difference in total marks. 5 It may be the mistake by the office of Bihar School Examination Board from where both the marks sheets were issued to the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the petitioner after completing training course appeared in the final examination and the Roll Number was 67, Roll Code 1101, the petitioner passed in said course and thereafter marks sheet and certificate was issued to him. The college issued marks sheet and as per the cross list/OTR of College record, total marks was shown as 938. The photo copy of the marks sheet and cross list bearing Roll No.67 has been annexed as Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit. Further it has been submitted that the petitioner had not conspirated with any authorities for issuance of first or second marks sheet rather it is a matter of record and the petitioner has not done anything wrong in the matter. Therefore, counter-affidavit filed by the respondent no.11 fully supports the case of the petitioner.
6. Reply/rejoinder of the petitioner to the counter-affidavit and supplementary counter-affidavit filed by respondent, has been filed wherein it has been submitted that in first marks sheet, which was issued to the petitioner, the total marks obtained in the matric training was shown as 938 and second marks sheet which was issued, total marks shown was 953. Subsequently when it was verified then the Bihar School Examination Board stick to marks sheet, the total marks as 953 and not 938. Subsequently, another marks sheet issued by the Examination Board, it was verified that total marks 953 is correct and verification report to that effect was issued by the Bihar School Examination Board on 18.03.2009 and addressed to the D.S.E. Chatra as is evident from Annexure-8 to the rejoinder affidavit.
7. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the records, I am of the considered view that in view of the submissions 6 made in the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent no.11, the case of the petitioner deserves to be reconsidered afresh.
8. In that view of the matter this Court is inclined to quash the impugned order dated 13.12.2011 passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Chatra (Annexure-5) and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for reinstatement in services after verification of necessary documents in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/communication of the order.
9. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands allowed.
(Pramath Patnaik, J.) RKM/-
N.A.F.R.