Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mehar Chand vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 16 October, 2014
Author: Satish Kumar Mittal
Bench: Satish Kumar Mittal, Deepak Sibal
LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION : 16.10.2014
Mehar Chand
.... APPELLANT
Versus
State of Haryana and others
..... RESPONDENTS
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
Present: Mr. Ravinder Malik, Advocate,
for the appellant.
Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
...
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J.
This intra court appeal under Clause X of Letters Patent has been filed against the order dated 10.02.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition (C.W.P. No.1801 of 2014) filed by the appellant challenging the order of his termination dated 23.07.2009 (Annexure P-6) as well as the orders dated 23.05.2013 (Annexure P-10) and 20.12.2013 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Appellate Authorities confirming the order of the Punishing Authority, has been dismissed.
The appellant was appointed as driver on contract basis in Haryana Roadways through Employment Exchange on 12.06.1992 to drive VINAY KUMAR 2014.11.05 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -2- the passenger vehicle on the basis of driving licence bearing No. M-3751 dated 12.06.1983 alleged to have been issued by the Transport Authority, Cuttack. His services were regularized as such on 13.02.1996. On 17.03.2001, the appellant while driving the passenger bus caused a motor accident in which one person died. For the said accident a criminal case was registered against him under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC. A claim petition was also filed by the legal heirs of the deceased under the Motor Vehicles Act. In the said claim petition, the aforesaid driving licence possessed by the appellant was found to be fake, due to which, the entire liability of the compensation was jointly fastened on the Haryana Roadways and the appellant, though the vehicle was insured. On receipt of the award by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in which the driving licence possessed by the appellant was found to be fake, a departmental enquiry was initiated against the appellant for taking disciplinary action against him. On the said charge, a regular enquiry was conducted in which also the driving licence possessed by the appellant at the time of seeking appointment as driver was found to be fake. On the basis of the enquiry report and after providing opportunity of hearing, the services of the appellant were terminated by the General Manager, Haryana Roadways on 23.07.2009. The said order was upheld by the Appellate Authorities. The writ petition filed by the appellant challenging those orders was dismissed by the learned Single Judge, which has been challenged in the present Letters Patent Appeal.
Before the learned Single Judge, an argument was raised that VINAY KUMAR 2014.11.05 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -3- the appellant was possessing two driving licences i.e. one bearing No.3751 of 1983 issued on 12.06.1983 and the other bearing No.656/83/84 issued on 17.06.1983, and the appellant got the employment on the second driving licence which on verification was found to be valid. On this contention, the original record of appointment of the appellant was summoned and as a fact it was found by the learned Single Judge that the appellant had got employment on the basis of licence bearing No. 3751 of 1983 issued on 12.06.1983, which was found to be fake, while making the following observations:-
"In compliance with the order passed by this Court, learned counsel for the State has produced the original records containing the application of the petitioner, copy of the driving licence as also the affidavit filed along with the application. A perusal of the same shows that the petitioner in the application had mentioned the licence No. as M-3751 dated 12.06.1983. Along with the said application, he had also submitted an affidavit dated 25.09.2001, in which also the driving licence number is the same. Even the copy of the driving licence, which has been appended, bears the same number. The contention thus, of the counsel for the petitioner as was made at the initial stage when the case was taken up for hearing has been found to be incorrect and thus cannot be accepted."
It was also argued that when the appellant was possessing two driving licences, out of which, one was genuine, in that situation the services of the appellant should not have been terminated. This contention was also rejected by the learned Single Judge while relying upon the VINAY KUMAR 2014.11.05 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -4- Division Bench decision of this Court in Jagmal Singh vs. State of Haryana and others, (CWP No.8420 of 2003 decided on 11.04.2005) and the judgment of the Supreme Court in District Collector and Chairman, Vizianagram vs. M. Tripura Sundra Devi, 1990(4) SLR 237, wherein it was observed that when the appointment has been procured on the basis of a fraudulent document, it would amount to a fraud on public employment and no Court should be a party to the perpetuation of fraudulent practice. In this regard, it was also observed by the learned Single Judge that one person cannot possess two driving licences at a given time as it is violative of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The learned counsel for the appellant has raised three contentions before us. Firstly, that in the criminal case registered against the appellant under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC, he was acquitted, however, the said factor was not taken into consideration by the Appellate Authorities as well as the learned Single Judge while upholding the order of the Punishing Authority in terminating the services of the appellant. In our view, the acquittal of the appellant in the criminal case has no bearing in the departmental proceedings initiated against the appellant while seeking employment on the basis of fake driving licence. It is now undisputed that the driving licence possessed by the appellant was a fake document. It is also undisputed position that the appellant got the employment as a driver on the basis of said fake driving licence. Before the criminal court, the issue was whether the appellant was negligent in driving or not, which resulted into the accident, but in the departmental enquiry, the issue was whether the VINAY KUMAR 2014.11.05 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -5- driving licence possessed by the appellant, on the basis of which he sought appointment, was fake or genuine. Therefore, the acquittal of the appellant in the criminal case has no bearing on this issue as the same is entirely different.
Secondly, it has been argued that the second driving licence possessed by the appellant was also of the year 1983, which was much prior to his appointment as a driver initially in the year 1992, therefore, the Punishing Authority and Appellate Authorities should have taken that fact into consideration. We do not find any force in this contention. Firstly, the factum that the appellant was possessing a second driving licence was never brought on record either in the criminal case or before the Tribunal. This fact was only brought in the departmental enquiry. Secondly, it is also a fact that this driving licence was with the appellant and he could have secured the job on the basis of that driving licence, but the appellant sought the employment on the basis of other driving licence which was later on found to be fake. Thirdly, in our opinion, one person cannot possess two driving licences at a given time. Therefore, this fact will not improve the case of the appellant and the learned Single Judge has rightly rejected this prayer of the appellant.
Thirdly, it has been argued that in pursuance of the letter dated 20.08.2001 issued by the State Transport Department all the driving licences possessed by the drivers of the Haryana Roadways, which were being issued by licensing authorities outside Haryana but renewed by the different authorities in the State of Haryana be verified, and if no proper verification VINAY KUMAR 2014.11.05 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -6- is done, a new driving licence be got issued to drivers by the competent authorities. The appellant was also issued driving licence bearing No.62/DTO/KKR/2001 on 10.09.2001. In view of the said valid driving licence, the services of the appellant should not have been terminated. Undisputedly, this driving licence was issued much after the motor accident which in this case had taken place on 17.03.2001 and that is why the Tribunal vide its award dated 10.3.2003 had held that the appellant did not possess valid driving licence on the date of accident. Even otherwise, once the misconduct of the appellant has been proved that he had procured the job of driver on the basis of fake driving licence, the order of termination was validly passed by the competent authority. This fact further indicates that both the driving licences possessed by the appellant after verification were not found to be genuine and that is why the new driving licence was issued to him. Therefore, a driver engaged to drive a passenger vehicle but possessing fake driving licence is a serious matter. In that situation, the lives of the passengers are at stake. Therefore, such misconduct should not be taken leniently.
Lastly, a contention was raised that keeping in view the fact that the appellant had served the respondent-department for 19 years, a lenient view should have been taken. In our opinion, the said contention has rightly been rejected by the learned Single Judge on the basis of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Jagmal Singh's case (supra) and the judgment of the Supreme Court in M. Tripura Sundra Devi's case (supra), while observing as under:-
VINAY KUMAR 2014.11.05 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh LPA No.871 of 2014 (O&M) -7-
".....If a candidate does not possess the qualification for appointment to the post and the certificate, which is produced, is found to be fake, the consequence has to be faced by such a candidate even if he has continued with the department for a long time. Merely because the petitioner in the present case has served the respondents for a period of 19 years, as has been stated by the counsel for the petitioner, would not condone the ineligibility of the petitioner for consideration for appointment to the post. As a matter of fact, because of a fake driving licence possessed by the petitioner, the same would amount to a criminal offence and if a person violates the provisions of the law, no sympathy, in such a situation, can be shown to that person, who has no respect for the law. This Court, in this view of the matter, is not inclined to exercise its extra- ordinary equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in favour of the petitioner."
In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.
( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE
October 16, 2014 ( DEEPAK SIBAL )
vkg JUDGE
VINAY KUMAR
2014.11.05 11:29
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh