Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mrs.Jaswinder Kaur vs Union Of India And Others on 30 January, 2014
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Arun Palli
CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002
Date of Decision:30.01.2014
Mrs.Jaswinder Kaur ....petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .....respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Mr.N.P.Mittal, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr.D.R.Sharma, Advocate
for the respondents
***
ARUN PALLI, JUDGE (ORAL):
(1) The petitioner was dismissed from service, duly preceded by a regular departmental inquiry, on the ground that she i.e.Jaswinder Kaur daughter of Sh.Maluk Singh and wife of Sh.Sumitter Singh obtained employment as Telephone Operator under DET (now GMT) Jalandhar, fraudulently by submitting a fake certificate dated 15.11.1972 of Higher Secondary Part I, Examination held in March 1972 and also a fake certificate dated 23.10.1973 of Higher Secondary Part II Examination held in March 1973 and Roll No.100308 in proof of her academic qualification.
Thus, she by grave misconduct on her part exhibited lack of integrity and contravened the provisions of Rule 3.1 (i) CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. The departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the appellate authority. This is what led the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'). Verma Neenu 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 2 (2) As is discernible from the records, the petitioner sought to assail the departmental action before the Tribunal primarily on two counts:
(i) at the time of passing of the impugned order she was holding the post of Telephone Supervisor in the pay scale of ` 1400-2300 (Annexure A-17). Her grievance was that in the case of Telephone Supervisor (LSG) and JTOs, the appointing authority is either the General Manager, Telecom or the Deputy General Manager, Telecom and since no power vests with the Divisional Engineer, Phones, he was not a competent authority to pass an order of dismissal.
(ii) That the certificates (as referred to above) were true and genuine and were duly issued by the Punjab School Education Board.
There was no fabrication. Hence the finding of guilt which has been recorded against her was perverse and untenable. (3) The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner (applicant), that her order of dismissal from service was not passed by the competent authority was rejected by the Tribunal. And in our opinion, rightly so.
The analysis of Annexure A-17 ( at page 77 of the paper book), which was sought to be relied upon by the petitioner to substantiate her case, itself, irresistibly shows that the decision regarding the placement of the applicant in the next higher grade of ` 1400-2300 was under a policy decision under which the staff are given the benefit of placement in the next higher scale of pay, while the cadre of incumbents remains the same. In fact, on completion of 16 years of service on the post of Lady Telephone Operator, the petitioner was placed in the higher grade of ` 1400-2300 w.e.f.23.01.1993 vide Annexure A-17 (supra). Hence, merely by virtue of her placement in the higher scale of pay, she does not become holder of the post in the lower selection grade.
Verma Neenu2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 3
Annexure R6 (at page 163 of the paper book), further makes this position abundantly clear, issued by the Ministry of Communications, Government of India, vide letter dated 12.07.1995, as to who are the appointing authorities in Grade III and IV after employees are placed in higher grade under the BCR scheme. It has been duly indicated that appointing authority in Grade III and IV cadres under the BCR will be the same as in the case of their respective basic cadres. It may be expedient and necessary, at this stage, to refer to the said letter dated 12.07.1995 (Annexure R-6), relevant portion whereof reads as thus:
"xxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxx With reference to your letter No. Staff/BCR/DPC/R1g/63 dated 2.3.95 on the above noted subject. I am directed to clarify that appointing authorities in Grade III & IV cadres under BCR scheme will be same as in the case of respective basic cadres."
At this stage, it may also be crucial to refer to another document i.e.Annexure R5 (at page 162 of the paper book), which is an extract from P & T Manual, Vol.III Schedule Part VI-General Central Services, Class III, which gives the hierarchy and mentions the appointing authorities and the competent authority to impose penalties as mentioned therein, on reading whereof makes it abundantly clear that respondent No.5 happen to be the appointing as well as the disciplinary authority of the petitioner. The relevant portion whereof, reads as thus:
P & T Manual Vol.III, Schedule Part VI-General Central Services, Class III Verma Neenu 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 4 Description of Appointing Authority competent to impose penalties & Posts Authority penalties which it may impose (with reference to item numbers in Rule 13) Authority Penalties Appellate Authority 1 2 3 4 5 Xxx Xxx Xxx Xxx Xxx All other posts Divisional Divisional All Director of Engineer, Engineer, Telegraphs;
Telegraphs Telegraphs Director of
Posts and
Telegraphs
This being so, there could hardly be any doubt insofar as competence and power of the Divisional Engineer, to pass an order of punishment against the petitioner.
(4) Even on merits, the Tribunal, on a thorough consideration and analysis of the records found that the matter before the Tribunal was of getting employment on the basis of forged document which apparently belonged to the sister of the applicant. It was also observed that a reading of the inquiry report shows that there was sufficient material before the inquiry officer and the disciplinary authority to come to a conclusion that the articles of charges levelled against the applicant stood fully proved. A reference was also made to the inquiries conducted by Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Superintendent of Police to say that the same were solicited only for the purposes of arriving at an opinion at the stage of issuing a charge sheet. Therefore, these would not nullify the facts which were duly proved and substantiated in the disciplinary proceedings. We may also note that the respondent-Department had entered into correspondence with the Punjab School Education Board and eventually found that the petitioner had used the certificates which did not belong to her for getting employment. Assertion of the petitioner that respondents should have examined the Secretary of the Board, who had signed the letter, showing that the applicant had not appeared in the particular Verma Neenu 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 5 examination, also did not find favour with the Tribunal, as it was observed that Annexure A-9 was an application for the job and there again it was doubtful as to what exactly was the date of birth of the petitioner as some tampering appeared to have been done. The Tribunal also opined viz-a-viz its jurisdiction to interfere in matter of such a nature as it was only in a case of no evidence the Tribunal could interfere. Since there was some evidence on the basis whereof a conclusion could safely be arrived at, as arrived by the disciplinary authority, the Tribunal chose not to go into the sufficiency of the evidence. Having perused the record and the inquiry report in particular, it was recorded in no uncertain terms that the principles of natural justice were fully adhered to. The grievance which had been made before the Tribunal that certain documents, despite having asked for, were never supplied to the petitioner, was also rejected as the petitioner failed to substantiate as to how the said documents were relevant and also as to what prejudice was suffered by the petitioner on account of denial of the copies thereof.
(5) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
(6) Besides, what has been referred to above, at this stage, it may also be expedient and necessary to make a reference to the analysis drawn by the inquiry officer, having regard to the case set out by the respective parties, which formed basis of his report and the same reads as thus:
Case of the Deptt.
According to the articles of charge and statement of imputation of misconduct, the charged official submitted fake certificates at the time of recruitment in the department. The authenticity of Verma Neenu 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 6 academic qualifications and date of birth particulars of the charged official were investigated by vigilance officers of the department and found differing. The prosecution projected to prove that her (1) certificate of HR.Sec.-I is fake (2)certificate of Hr.Sec-II is fake and (3) wrong date of birth. The P.O. pointed out that in SW-1, the charged official has quoted her date of birth as 10.05.58. In SW-2, date of birth is also shown as 10.05.58 but in SW-6 the date of birth is clarified to be 10.05.54 not 10.05.58 and the particulars of SW-2 are also clarified to be relating to Balwinder Kaur d/o Maluk Singh. SW-6 also clarifies about particulars of SW-3 to be relating to Balwinder Kaur d/o Maluk Singh and not that of Jaswinder Kaur. SW-4 is a document admitting appointment as telephone operator at Phagwara w.e.f.24.06.81. In document listed SW-5, SW-5/1 to SW-5/4 the prosecution elicits the correspondence between department and Punjab School Education Board Mohali. SW-6 is the end result of correspondence. It asserts that particulars of references of SW-2 and SW-3 actually pertain to Balwinder Kaur d/o Maluk Singh and not Jaswinder Kaur d/o Maluk Singh. Documents listed as SW-1, SW-4, SW-5, SW-5/1 to SW-5/4 and SW-6 are original documents while SW-2 and SW-3 are only unattested photo copies. The first state witness Shri P.K.Sareen SDE (HRD) O/o GMTD Jalandhar in his statement on Verma Neenu 23.12.97 stated that Smt.Jaswinder Kaur applied for 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 7 the post of Telephone Operator on 10.01.1981 showing date of birth 10.05.58 and showing educational qualification as higher secondary part II and appointment orders were issued vide memo No.E-143/XVII/TOs/146 dated 9.3.82 by the DET Jalandhar. Later on receipt of complaint regarding submission of fake certificates at the time of recruitment, investigation was initiated and confirmed from the O/o Punjab School Education Board Chandigarh and the facts were proved that certificates were fictitious as it was issued in the name of Balwinder Kaur d/o Shri Maluk Singh having date of birth 10.05.54 instead of 10.5.58. On 2.2.98, P.O.during cross examination confirmed that SW-1 is the application at the time of recruitment, SW2 to SW- 4 misquoted then due to clerical mistake as S-2 and S-4, were other documents listed in Annexure-III, on the basis of which charged official was appointed as Telephone Operator. SW-5 and SW-6 are documentary records of perusal made with Punjab State Education Board, Mohali. On this day i.e.2.2.98, second witness Shri Gurcharan Singh earlier V.O (T) O/o CGMT Chandigarh made a detailed witness statement, the substance of which was that during the course of investigation of complaint against Smt.Jaswinder Kaur, sufficient circumstantial evidence came to be noticed that Smt.Balwinder Verma Neenu Kaur, a sister of the charged official and posted at Sri 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 8 Goindwal Sahib as music teacher, passed her Hr.
Sec.Part I and Part II examinations from Phagwara school where the charged official did not study and had not passed Hr.Sec.Part I and Hr.Sec.Part II classes during the concerned periods. These investigations raised suspicions and led this second state witness Shri Gurcharan Singh V.O(T) to persue and make inquiries in this context. As a result of his investigations and consequent perusal with Punjab State Education Board, Mohali, the documents listed as SW-6 was issued by the board giving verification details in respect of name of Balwinder Kaur d/o Maluk Singh and not Jaswinder Kaur d/o Maluk Singh who had passed Hr.Sec.Part-I and Part II examinations under Roll Nos. quoted in listed documents SW-2 and SW-3 and also date of birth. Defence:
The charged official did not engage or nominate any suitable defence, assistant. She denied the charge in whole and had requested to be heard orally. Despite her occasional ill health, she attended most of hearings and behaved sober. On 20.11.97 she presented the list of defence witnesses and documents. On 28.11.97, relevancy of defence documents was considered and listed as considered relevant. All the listed defence documents DW-1 to DW-5 are photo copies and not original documents. Verma Neenu The charged official argued that 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 9 original certificates quoted received back in SW-1 had actually not been received back by her. DW-1, DW-2 are photo copies of certificates issued by Punjab State Education Board, Mohali. Both of these copies are not clear. DW-3 document is regarding her recruitment process and the charged official had been requested to bring back her original certificates for verification. DW-4 documents, is a letter from Supdt.(Certificate) for secretary, Punjab Stated Education Board Mohali, seeking original/duplicate certificate for GMT(D) Jalandhar for verifications. It implies to her contention that her original certificates had not been received back by her but perhaps used by the department for verification by DW-5. She implies that the complaint actually related to Smt.Balwinder Kaur, Music Teacher Kapurthala. On the top, the same is marked for VO(T) AB at Chandigarh. She contends in her defence brief that acceptance of probability of being a classmate, Neelam Rani, first defence in press, should be considered as admission by P.O. that the charged official was a class mate of Neelam Rani. Neelam Rani did not appear for witness. She has also protested against suspicions regarding her academic qualifications on the basis of her badly spelled language on SW-1. She asserts that her signatures on SW-1 are forged and that she had not received Verma Neenu back the original certificate. She has also submitted 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 10 some additional documents with the defence brief, which have not been presented or got listed by her earlier. The substance in presenting these additional documents is that there could have been composing and clerical mistakes in connection with results and certificates relating to her academic qualifications. She has also contested that the issue of fake certificates which has come up after about 16 years of her satisfactory service in the department is not justified to be raised as the same, she contends, would have been verified at different stages during her service and promotion.
The second defence witness, dealing assistant office of SDE (HRD) appeared on 12.2.98. It did not mature on this date. On 24.2.98, Shri C.L.Gill, CSS, O/o SDE(HRD) appeared as dealing assistant witness. He stated that it was in his knowledge the charged official had been charge sheeted on grounds of submission of fake certificates at the time of recruitment. He further clarified that original documents were received back by her.
In her defence brief, she has also cited some legal decisions by various honourable courts, in addition to some Govt. of India orders.
She has also pointed out that the complaints against her were due to personal prejudices against her husband Shri Sumitter Singh Verma Neenu and she was being made a kind of victim. She has 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.13476-CAT of 2002 11 also raised protests at some occasions during the inquiry.
Analysis:
The listed documents except SW-2 and SW-3 which one were unattested photo copies and statements of the prosecution witnesses hold credibility. The correspondence made by the department (SW-4, SW-5, 5/1 to 5/4) and verification communication by the Punjab State Education Board Mohali (SW-6) are confirmatory of the fakeness of particulars exhibited in documents SW-2, SW-3 and relating DW-1 and DW-2. There is a absence of original academic certificates or their attested photo copies on both sides. This eliminates the defence context against prosecutions, listed original documents SW-6 and its particulars.
(7) We have examined the records and in view of the above, we find no reason, least plausible, to interfere with the decision arrived at by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
(SANJAY KISHAN KAUL) CHIEF JUSTICE 30.01.2014 neenu (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE Verma Neenu 2014.02.05 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh