Punjab-Haryana High Court
Satyabir Singh vs The Managing Director, Dhbvn And Ors on 29 November, 2025
1
CWP-18580
18580-2016
2016 and other connected matters
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
1. CWP-18580-2016
Sunil Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
The Managing Director and others ...Respondents
2. CWP-20932-2016
Anil Kumar and others ...Petitioners
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN) and others
...Respondents
3. CWP-20991-2016
Bir Singh and another ...Petitioners
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN) and others
...Respondents
4. CWP-21446-2016
Hanuman and another ...Petitioners
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN) and others
...Respondents
5. CWP-23390-2016
Rohit Yadav ...Petitioner
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others
...Respondents
1 of 23
::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:57 :::
2
CWP-18580
18580-2016
2016 and other connected matters
6. CWP-23419-2016
Sandeep Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others
...Respondents
7. CWP-24157-2016
Satish Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
8 CWP-2642-2015
Satyabir Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
The Managing Director, DHBVN and others ...Respondents
9. CWP-4574-2015
Manmohar Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others
...Respondents
10. CWP-5145-2015
Anoop Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
Managing Director, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others
...Respondents
2 of 23
::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 :::
3
CWP-18580
18580-2016
2016 and other connected matters
11. CWP-5364-2017
Ravinder Singh Yadav ...Petitioner
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others
...Respondents
12. CWP-6624-2013
Sunder Singh and others ...Petitioners
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN) and others
...Respondents
13. CWP-8395-2013
Bhupender Kumar and others ...Petitioners
...Petitioner
Versus
The Chief Engineer/Admn. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited and
others
...Respondents
14. CWP-8091-2018
Dara Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
15. CWP-21933-2016
Pawan Kumar and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
3 of 23
::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 :::
4
CWP-18580
18580-2016
2016 and other connected matters
Reserved on 20.11.2025
Pronounced on: 29.11.2025
Uploaded on:29.11.2025
Whether only the operative part of judgment is pronounced? No
Whether full judgment is pronounced? Yes
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Vaneet Soni, Advocate for the petitioner(s) in CWP
CWP-6624-
2023, 4374-2015, 20932-2016,
2016, 21446
21446-2016, 20991-2016.
Mr. Manoj Tanwar, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP
CWP-21933
21933-
2016.
Mr. Tarun Yadav, Advocate for petitioner in CWP
CWP-5145-2015.
2015.
Mr. Saurabh
rabh Gulia, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP
CWP-24157--
2016.
Mr. Vijay Pal and Mr.Akash Lather, Advocate for the
petitioner(s) in CWP-2642-2015,
2015, 23390
23390-2015, 23149-2016,
8091-2018 and 11979-2023.
Mr. Lokendra and Mr.Arvind K. Bangar, Advocate for the
petitioner in CWP-18580-2016.
2016.
Mr. Arun Singla, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Ravi Ambawata, Advocate for Mr.Sanjay Mittal, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP-5364
5364-2017.
Mr. Manuj Kaushik, Advocate and Mr. Tarsem Rana, Advocate
for the respondent(s)-DHBVNL
DHBVNL in CWP-6624-2013 and 8395--
2013.
Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 3 in
CWP-5145-2015.
Mr. Ashok S. Chaudhary, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5
in CWP-2642-2015 and CWP--4574-2015.
4 of 23
::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 :::
5
CWP-18580
18580-2016
2016 and other connected matters
HARPREET SINGH BRAR,
BRAR J.
1. This common order shall dispose of all the writ petitions
mentioned above as they arise from similar factual matrix and also pose a
similar question of law. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken
from CWP--18580-2016.
2. The present civil writ petition has been fil
filed
ed under Articles
226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of
certiorari for quashing of office order No.228 dated 30.08.2016 (Annexure
P-6)
6) whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be dismissed from service,
as well as show
show cause notice dated 14.03.2016 and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
3. The respondent-DHBVN DHBVN initiated recruitment process for filling up the vacancies for the post of Assistant Lineman (ALM) and various other posts through respondent No.4 No.4-Haryana Haryana Staff Selection Commission vide advertisement No.4 of 2008. The advertisement laid down the following eligibility criteria-
criteria "Matric with two years ITI in Electrician/Wireman trade or having 2 years Vocational Course under th thee trade of Lineman conducted by Director, ITI &Vocational Education, Haryana from any institute recognised by the State Government and must have passed Hindi/Sanskrit up to Matric Standard.
Standard."
4. In pursuance of the said advertisement, the petitioner appli applied ed for recruitment to the post of ALM under the Backward Class Class- B (BC-B) B) 5 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 6 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters category. Upon ascertaining the eligibility of the petitioner, he was called for the written test followed by an interview. Thereafter, he was appointed as an ALM vide letter dated 12.05.2010 12.05.2010 (Annexure P P-2)
2) which reiterated the eligibility criteria and called upon the petitioner to submit original certificates in support of his qualifications at the time of joining. The ITI certificate of the petitioner was sent to the Principal, Natio National nal Industrial Training Institute (Vocational Training Centre), Rewari (hereinafter 'NITI, Rewari') for verification. The same was successfully verified and the service of the petitioner was confirmed. As a matter of fact, he was also promoted to the post of Lineman vide office order dated 31.12.2014.
5. After a lapse of about 06 years, respondent respondent-DHBVN DHBVN suspended the service of the petitioner vide order dated 23.02.2016 (Annexure P P-3)
3) on the ground that he had obtained his appointment on the basis of a fa fake ke certificate. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner moved this Court by means of CWP-5930 5930-2016 2016 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 23.02.2016. A show cause notice dated 14.03.2016 (Annexure P P-4)
4) was issued to the petitioner in furtherance of of which he submitted a detailed reply. However, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide impugned order dated 30.08.2016 (Annexure P-6).
P CONTENTIONS
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is a confirmed employee of respondent-DHBVN respondent DHBVN and the any disciplinary proceedings initiated against him have to be strictly in terms of DHBVN 6 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 7 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters Employees (Punishment and Appeal) Regulations, 201 2016 6 (hereinafter 'Regulations of 2016'). Since dismissal from service is a major punishment, the procedure laid down under Regulation 7 has to be followed. However, in contravention of the same, neither any charge charge-sheet sheet was served upon the petitioner nor any misconduct in terms of the Regulations of 2016 has been proved against him; as such, the impugned order deserves to be set aside on this ground alone.
7. He further argued that the petitioner has been dismissed from service on the false premise that his ITI certificate is fake, which has not been established on record. The petitioner had submitted all relevant documents for scrutiny at the relevant stage of the selection process. Only upon verification of the same was the petitioner appointed to the post of ALM. Once the concerned authority has exercised its power to examine the eligibility of a candidate, it cannot retrospectively declare him ineligible. In spite of a long drawn out selection process, the respondent respondent-DHBVN DHBVN dismissed the petitioner stating that NITI, Rewari is an unrecognised institution and therefore, the certificates issued by it are invalid.
8. The petitioner neither misrepresented nor concealed any facts. Surprisingly, after the petitioner had already rendered six years of impeccable service, the XEN/Op. Division, DHBVN, Dharuhera sought clarification regarding genuineness of certificates issued by NITI, Rewari from the Haryana Industrial Training Directorate,, vide memo dated 18.12.2015. Relying upon the judgment rendered by a Divisio Divisionn Bench of 7 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 8 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters this Court in Home-cum-Education Education Secretary and another vs. Pafna and another in CWP-2986-2015 CWP decided on 28.04.2016 28.04.2016, learned counsel contended that there is a marked difference between a 'fake' degree and an 'unrecognised' degree, especially in view of the fact that the petitioner had no means of knowing the nature of the institution at the relevant time. The petitioner is a well-trained well trained professional which is also evident from the fact of his promotion to the post of Lineman. Terminating the serv services ices of the petitioner at such a belated stage is completely arbitrary and would cause irreparable loss to him by rendering him unemployed. Learned counsel have also place reliance on the judgments rendered by this Court in Ram Bhagat Sharma vs. State of Haryana, Haryana, Bidhi Chand vs. The Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others 2002(4) SCT 1028 1028, Satnam Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others to support their case.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent respondent-DHBVN DHBVN submitted that the appointment of the petitioner petitioner was subject to fulfilment of conditions listed in the offer of appointment letter dated 12.05.2010 (Annexure P P-2).
2).
Regulation 1.2 of the Recruitment and Promotion Policy of Non Non-Gazetted Gazetted Technical Staff, as applicable to DHBVN, requires a candidate seeking appointment to the post of ALM to possess an ITI certificate for Electrician/Wireman trade or have completed 02 years of Vocational course in the trade of Lineman. However, the petitioner has received his certification from NITI, Rewari which is no nott recognised by the Haryana Industrial Training Directorate, as intimated vide memo dated 29.12.2015 8 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 9 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters (Annexure R-1/1).
R 1/1). Upon receiving this information, the respondent respondent-DHBVN DHBVN placed the petitioner under suspension and duly served a show show-cause cause notice dated 14.03.2016 .03.2016 upon him. Further, Para No.7 of the offer of appointment letter (Annexure P-2) P 2) specifically states that the certification should be obtained by "any "any institute recognised by the State Govt."
Govt."As As such, the petitioner does not meet the eligibility cri criteria teria to serve the respondent-
respondent DHBVN. The promotion to the petitioner was also granted on probationary basis, only in view of the seniority. Learned counsel also places reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court in Azad Rakib vs. Dakshin Haryana CWP-17101-2017 decided on Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others CWP 06.09.2019 wherein the dismissal of petitioner from service on account of ITI certificate from a bogus institute, was upheld in spite of the fact that he had served the concerned department for 07 year yearss and received a promotion.
Furthermore, the applicant should possess the desired qualification on the date of the application and not subsequently, in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others othe 2013(4) SCT 543.
OBSERVATIONS AND ANALYSIS
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the abovementioned cases, it transpires that adverse action of suspension/termination, as the case may be, has been taken agai against nst the petitioner(s) on discovering that they do not possess valid certification to continue serving on the post they had erroneously been appointed to. While 9 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 10 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters one set of matter pertains to the forged and fabricated certificates, another set relates to certificates certificates that have been found to be issued by institutions not recognised by the Haryana Industrial Training Directorate.
11. A reference eference must be made the legal maxims maxims- nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria which can be translated to to- no man can take advantage of his own wrong, and sublato fundamento cadit opus which translates to-
to when the foundation is removed, the structure falls. When employment itself has been secured by playing fraud on the hiring authority, the delay in discovery of the charade cannot be used as a defence against adverse consequences. Further, no protection can be claimed by such employees in terms of Regulations of 2016 as these Regulations provide the procedure that ought to be adopted in the event of any misconduc misconductt on part of an employee during the course of his service. Since the petitioner(s) in CWP-233390 233390-2016, CWP-23419-2016 2016 and CWP CWP-8091-2018 2018 obtained employment on the basis of a forged and fabricated certificate, their service becomes void ab initio and thus, the benefit of the prescribed procedure under Regulation 7 cannot be made available to them merely to escape accountability as fraud vitiates all. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Prohlad Guha 2024 AIR SC 3588 and this Court in Kuldeep vs. State of Haryana in CWP-26033-2025 decided on 03.09.2025.
12. Reliance in this regard can also be placed on the judgment rendered by a two-Judge two Judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Co Court in Ram 10 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 11 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters Chandra Singh vs. Savitri Devi and others (2003) 8 SCC 319, wherein speaking through Justice S.B.Sinha, the following was opined:
"15. Commission of fraud on court and suppression of material facts are the core issues involved in these matters. Fraud as is well known vitiates every solemn act. Fraud and justice never dwell together.
16. Fraud is a conduct either by letter or words, which induces the other person or authority to take a definite determinative stand as a response to the conduct of the the former either by word or letter.
17. It is also well settled that misrepresentation itself amounts to fraud. Indeed, innocent misrepresentation may also give reason to claim relief against fraud.
18. A fraudulent misrepresentation is called deceit and cconsists onsists in leading a man into damage by wilfully or recklessly causing him to believe and act on falsehood. It is a fraud in law if a party makes representations which he knows to be false, and injury ensues therefrom although the motive from which the rep representations resentations proceeded may not have been bad.
19. In Derry v. Peek, (1889)14 AC 337 : (1886 (1886-90)
90) All ER Rep 1 : 58 LJ Ch 864 : 61 LT 265 (HL). it was held:
"In an `action of deceit the plaintiff must prove actual fraud. Fraud is proved when it is shown that a false representation has been made knowingly, or without belief in its truth, or recklessly, without caring whether it be true or false.
A false statement, made through carelessness and without reasonable ground for believing it to be true, may be evidence nce of fraud but does not necessarily amount to fraud. Such a statement, if made in the honest belief that it is true, is not fraudulent and does not render the person making it liable to an action of deceit.
20. In Kerr on Fraud and Mistake, at p. 23, it is stated:
"The true and only sound principle to be derived from the cases represented by Slim v. Croucher Croucher,, (1860)1 De GF & J 518 : 29 LJ Ch 273 : 2 LT 103 : 45 ER 462. is this: that a representation is fraudulent not only when the person making it knows iitt to be false, but also when, as Jessel, M.R., pointed out, he ought to have known, or must be taken to have known, that it was false. This is a sound and intelligible principle, and is, moreover, not inconsistent with Derry v. Peek Peek, (1889)14 AC 337 : (1886-90) 90) All ER Rep 1 : 58 LJ Ch 864 : 61 LT 265 (HL).. A false statement which a person ought to have known was false, and which he must therefore be taken to have known was false, cannot be said to be honestly believed in. 'A consideration of
11 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 12 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters the grounds of belief', said Lord Herschell, 'is no doubt an important aid in ascertaining whether the belief was really entertained. A man's mere assertion that he believed the statement he made to be true is not accepted as conclusive proof that he did so.'"
21. In Bigelow on Fraudulent Conveyances, at p. 1, it is stated:
"If on the facts the average man would have intended wrong, that is enough."
22. It was further opined:
"This conception of fraud (and since it is not the writer's, he may speak of it without diffidence), ence), steadily kept in view, will render the administration of the law less difficult, or rather will make its administration more effective. Further, not to enlarge upon the last matter, it will do away with much of the prevalent confusion in regard to 'moral'moral' fraud, a confusion which, in addition to other things, often causes lawyers to take refuge behind such convenient and indeed useful but often obscure language as 'fraud upon the law'. What is fraud upon the law?
Fraud can be committed only against a being capable of rights, and 'fraud upon the law' darkens counsel. What is really aimed at in most cases by this obscure contrast between moral fraud and fraud upon the law, is a contrast between fraud in the individual's intention to commit the wrong and fraud as seen in the obvious tendency of the act in question."
23. Recently this Court by an order dated 33-9-2003 in Ram Preeti Yadav v. U.P. Board of High School & Intermediate Education, (2003)8 SCC 311 : JT 2003 Supp (1) SC 25. held:
"Fraud is a conductt either by letter or words, which induces the other person or authority to take a definite determinative stand as a response to the conduct of the former either by words or letter. Although negligence is not fraud but it can be evidence on fraud. (See Derry ry v. Peek, (1889)14 AC 337:.) In Lazarus Estates Ltd. v. Beasley, (1956)1 All ER 341: the Court of Appeal stated the law thus:
'I cannot accede to this argument for a moment. No court in this land will allow a person to keep an advantage which he has obtained by fraud. No judgment of a court , no order of a minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. Fraud unravels everything. The court is careful not to find fraud unless it is distinctly pleaded and proved; but once it is prove proved d it vitiates judgments, contracts and all transactions whatsoever;"
In S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, (1994)1 SCC 1 this Court stated that fraud avoids all judicial acts, 12 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 13 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters ecclesiastical or temporal."
24. An act of fraud on court is always viewed sseriously.
eriously. A collusion or conspiracy with a view to deprive the rights of the others in relation to a property would render the transaction void ab initio.
synonymous."(emphasis added) Fraud and deception are synonymous. 12.1. Further, a three-Judge Judge bench of the Hon' Hon'ble ble Supreme Court in Jainendra Singh vs. State of U.P. Tr. Prinl. Sec. Home (2012) 8 SCC 748, has categorically held that no estoppels would operate in favour of those who acquired employment by defrauding the employer. Speaking through Justice Fakkir Mohamed Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, the following was held:
"31. As noted by us, all the above decisions were rendered by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of twotwo-Judges Judges and having bestowed our serious consideration to the issue, we consider that while dealing with such an issue, the Court will have to bear in mind the various cardinal principles before granting any relief to the aggrieved party, namely:
(i) Fraudulently obtained orders of appointment could be legitimately treated as voidable at the option of th thee employer or could be recalled by the employer and in such cases merely because the respondent employee has continued in service for a number of years, on the basis of such fraudulently obtained employment, cannot get any equity in his favour or any estoppel pel against the employer.
(ii) Verification of the character and antecedents is one of the important criteria to test whether the selected candidate is suitable to the post under the State and on account of his antecedents the appointing authority if find not desirable to appoint a person to a disciplined force can it be said to be unwarranted.
(iii) When appointment was procured by a person on the basis of forged documents, it would amount to misrepresentation and fraud on the employer and, therefore, it w would ould create no equity in his favour or any estoppel against the employer while resorting to termination without holding any inquiry.
(iv) A candidate having suppressed material information and/or giving false information cannot claim right to continue in service ervice and the employer, having regard to the nature of employment as well as other aspects, has the discretion to
13 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 14 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters terminate his services. Purpose of calling for information regarding involvement in any criminal case or detention or conviction is for the purpose urpose of verification of the character/antecedents at the time of recruitment and suppression of such material information will have clear bearing on the character and antecedents of the candidate in relation to his continuity in service.
(v) The person who ho suppressed the material information and/or gives false information cannot claim any right for appointment or continuity in service.
xxx xxx xxx"
13. Moving on, in some of the writ petitions listed above, the petitioner(s) were suspended/dismissed upon discovering that the certificate-
certificate issuing authority which happens to be NITI, Rewari does not possess the requisite recognition from Haryana Industrial Training Directorate.. This factum has also been corroborated by the Directorate as discernible from Annexure R-1/1, R 1/1, which also provides a list of similar bogus institutes. This Court in Bidhi Chand (supra), has categorically held that experience cannot be equated uated with education, especially for jobs where skill and expertise is vital while in Satnam Kaur (supra) it was opined that long duration of service is not reason enough to forego the original requirements. Further, this Court in Ram Bhagat Sharma (supra) (supra),, speaking through Justice G.S. Singhvi, observed as follows:
"18. We also do not find any merit in the argument of Shri Sangwan that the examinations conducted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, through the centres established in the State of Haryana should hould be treated as duly recognised because a number of candidates who have passed such examinations have already been employed as Hindi Teachers in the Education department of the State of Haryana. The issue of recognition of the examination conducted by a particular institution has to be considered and decided by the authority which
14 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 15 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters prescribes the qualifications for recruitment to a particular post. In this case, it is the State Government which prescribes the requisite qualifications. Therefore, the deci decision sion to recognise or not to recognise the particular qualifications has to be taken by the State Government and not by the Court. Admittedly, the State Government has not taken such a decision, therefore, we cannot draw an inference on the issue of recogni recognition tion of qualifications merely because some persons possessing similar qualifications have been appointed as Hindi Teachers. In this regard, it will be useful to refer to the observations made by the Supreme Court in Director, AIIMS and others v. Dr. Nikhil Tandon and others, 1996(7) Supreme Court Cases 741 : 1996(2) SCT 270 270.
''The two years' training at the Cambridge University undergone by the respondent while working for his Ph.D. cannot be treated as a qualification recognised as equivalent to DM. Schedule le I to the AIIMS Recruitment Rules speaks of DM qualification or a qualification recognised as equivalent thereto. It is not mere equivalence that is enough. It must also be recognised as equivalent.
Recognised evidently means recognised by the Institute or at least by the Medical Council of India. Admittedly, neither has recognised the said research work/training for two years in the Cambridge University as equivalent to DM." 13.1. As a matter of fact, this Court in Ram Bhagat Sharma (supra) had gave an opportunity to the teachers who had obtained the requisite qualification from an unrecognised institution but had completed 03 years of service, to acquire the desired qualification within a stipulated time. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar mar vs. U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (2008) 7 SCC 153 disagreed with this approach. Speaking through Justice S.B. Sinha, the following was observed:
"24. A departmental proceeding against the appellant might have been initiated after the change of management. We will also assume that the said proceeding was initiated after the contempt proceeding was initiated. Appellant, however, has filed a writ appl application ication for issuance of or in the nature of a writ of mandamus. He, therefore, 15 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 16 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters must establish existence of a legal right in himself and a corresponding legal duty in the State. If he did not possess the requisite qualification to hold a post, he could not have any legal right to continue. It was, therefore, immaterial as to why and when the said proceeding had been initiated against him.
Reliance placed by Mr. P.S. Patwalia on Shainda Hasan v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others [(1990)3 SCC 48] is not apposite. ite. Therein a concession was made on behalf of the State that the University had agreed that asking the appellant therein to leave the job after 16 years will be doing injustice to her. Such a view might have been taken by this Court in exercise of its extra extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The question, however, that arose therein was as to whether the Selection Committee could grant relaxation of the educational quali qualification vis-a-vis the experience required to be obtained. It was held that such a power did not exist in the Selection Committee.
It was, therefore, a case where relaxation in regard to experience was sought for and granted. It was not a case where the aappellant ppellant therein lacked basic educational qualification. Herein, we are concerned with a case where the appellant lacked basic educational qualification.
xxx xxx xxx
27. A similar question, on the other hand, came up for consideration before this Court Cou in Ravinder Sharma (Smt.) and Another v. State of Punjab and Others, 1995(1) SCT 48 : [(1995)1 SCC 138] wherein a three Judges' Bench held :
"12. The appellant was directly appointed. In such a case, the qualification must be either :
(i) A Graduate/Intermediate ermediate second class or,
(ii) Matric first class.
Admittedly, the appellant did not possess this qualification. That being so, the appointment is bad. The Commission recommended to the Government for relaxation of the qualification under Regulation 7 of the Regulations. The Government rejected that recommendation. Where, therefore, the appointment was clearly against Regulation 7, it was liable to be set aside. That being so, no question of estoppel would ever arise. We respectfully agree with the view taken ken by the High Court."
28. Almost to the same effect is the decision of this Court in Mohd. Sartaj and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Others, 2006(1) SCT 610 : [JT 2006(1) SC 331] holding :
16 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 17 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters "It It is settled law that the qualification should have been seen which the candidate possessed on the date of recruitment and not at a later stage unless rules to that regard permit it. The minimum qualification prescribed under Rule 8 should be fulfilled on the date of recruitment. Equivalence of degree of Moallium-e-Urdu, Jamia Urdu Aligarh with that of B.T.C. in the year 1994 would not entail the benefit to the appellants on the date they were appointed. The appellants could not have been appointed to the post of Asstt. Teachers without having training required under Rule 8. That being the case, the appointments of the appellants were de hors the Rules and could not be treated to be continued. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any substance in the appeals and are, accordingly, dismissed."
29. Recently again in Ashok k Kumar Sonkar v. Union of India and Others, 2007(2) SCT 19 : [(2007)4 SCC 54], it was held :
"16. Indisputably, the appellant herein did not hold the requisite qualification as on the said cut cut-off off date. He was, therefore, not eligible therefor therefor.""
(emphasis added)
14. It is the prerogative of the hiring authority to lay out an eligibility criterion as it is best suited to understand the role and its requirements and this Court cannot interfere with it. In the offer to appointment letters issued by by the respondents, it has been specifically stipulated that the appointment shall be subject to fulfilment of conditions contained therein. As mentioned in the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, para 7 of the offer to appointment letter reads as follows:
"The above offer of appointment is being made to you on the distinct understanding:
understanding:-
7.1. That you actually possess the following qualification and will produce all the original certificates in its support:
support:-
7.1.1. Matric with 2 years ITI Electrician/Wireman trade or having 2 years Vocational course under the trade of Lineman conducted by Director, ITI and Vocational Education, Haryana from any institute recognized by the State Govt."
Govt. (emphasis
added)
17 of 23
::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 :::
18
CWP-18580
18580-2016
2016 and other connected matters
15. There is no ambiguity that the requisite technical qualification had to be obtained from an institution recognised by the State Government at the time of recruitment. As such, the petitioner(s) are expected to ensure that they do in fact qualify for appointment. The petitioner(s) cannot escape liability by placing the entire burden to weed out wrongly appointed employees on the State particularly when they failed to exercise due care.
Allowing such an approach would amount to legitimising a wrongf wrongful ul act merely because it went undetected. A two two-Judge Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Council for Teacher Education vs. Venus 223,, speaking through Justice Public Education Society (2013) 1 SCC 223 Dipak Misra made the following observations:
"35. Now, to the last plank of submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. It is urged by him that the NCTE had procrastinated its decision at every stage and such delay was deliberate and, therefore, the society was compelled to admit the student studentss and impart education, regard being had to the fact that there were really no deficiencies. As has been laid down in many a pronouncement of this Court that without recognition from the NCTE and affiliation from the university/examining body, the educatio educational nal institution cannot admit the students. An educational institution is expected to be aware of the law. The students who take admission are not young in age. They are graduates. They are expected to enquire whether the affiliation. If we allow ourselves to institution has recognition and affiliation. say so, the institution had given admission in a nonchalant manner. Possibly, its functionaries harboured the idea that they had incomparable fertile mind. The students who had taken admission possibly immersed with the idea idea that ignorance is a bliss. It is also necessary to state that the institution had the anxious enthusiasm to commercialize education and earn money forgetting the factum that such an attitude leads to a disaster. The students exhibited tremendous anxiety anxiety to get a degree without bothering for a moment whether their effort, if any, had the sanctity of law. Such attitudes 18 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 19 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters only bring nemesis. It would not be wrong to say that this is not a case which put the institution or the students to choose between Scylla and charybdis. On the contrary, both of them were expected to be Argus-eyed.
Argus eyed. The basic motto should have been "transparency". Unfortunately, the institution betrayed the trust of the students and the students, in a way, atrophied their intelligence. The institution decidedly exhibited characteristics of carelessness. It seems that they had forgotten that they are accountable to law. The students, while thinking "vision of hope", chose to play possum. The law does not countenance either oof the ideas. Hence, the plea propounded with anxiety, vehemence and desperation on behalf of the appellant is not acceptable and, accordingly we unhesitatingly repel the same."
Reliance in this regard can also be placed on the judgment rendered by this Court C in Monu vs. State of Haryana in CWP-4559-2025 2025 decided on 13.11.2025.
16. Be that as it may, the respondent respondent-DHBVN DHBVN must also be held accountable. Public employment opportunities are highly coveted as it carries with itself the assurance of stability and dignity. However, given its scarce nature, every such opportunity assumes great significance for aspirants who pursue it with commendable dedication and hope. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to ensure that the recruitment process remains sacrosanct, osanct, transparent and free from evils of arbitrariness. It must be duly appreciated that hiring an ineligible candidate also means depriving a deserving candidate of the opportunity to be in service of the State and the benefits emanating therefrom. The sentiments of this Court were also echoed by a Co-ordinate ordinate bench while issuing notice of motion in the present case vide order dated 07.09.2016. The same is reproduced below:
" Heard. There may hardly be any doubt that the trade certificate on the basis of which employment was offered to the 19 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 20 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters petitioner by the Nigam was bogus, if not a fake document, since the Institute from where it was obtained was not recognized by the Haryana Government. On the basis of this certificate, the petitioner's services have been terminated by the impugned order. The Nigam has taken extreme action on discovery of the fact. But the larger issue which remains is that what steps is the Government of Haryana taking about reigning in these teaching shops going by the name of Nation National al Training Institutes spread across Haryana duping gullible students with worthless certificates which they may have innocently believed to be genuine while applying for public posts advertised by the Nigam. As far as termination is concerned and it valid validity, ity, the respondent Nigam would be heard on notice issued to justify action taken.
However, at the initial stage the State is ordered to be impleaded as respondent No.4 through the Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana to express the views of the Gover Government nment on such institutions and whether they should be permitted to run on Haryana soil only to dupe students and leave them in the lurch. The Chief Secretary or his nominee would file an affidavit on the above including explaining why Government itself shoshould uld not take firm steps to initiate criminal and civil action against such institutions and their managements for cheating and practicing deceit etc. and to examine the feasibility in reconsideration of the cases where change of land use has been granted toto permit constructions to be raised in the name of imparting education and to consider the advisability of withdrawing such permissions and to call upon their managements to return the land to the rightful previous owner/s. This appears to be the only stern stern way out to stop cheating and sharp practises resorted to by managements which can be stopped in Haryana by its Government committed, as it must be, to the cause of technical education, and also with a view to safeguard this Court against wasted time in ssuch uch litigation.
Had the Nigam in the very beginning made an inquiry into the validity of the certificate by timely scrutiny of documents relied upon by a candidate, this case would not have arisen, had appointment been denied at the threshold. The Nigam let time slip by for 6 years and then woke up to throw the petitioner out of job.
The Nigam, on its part, will also explain on affidavit its lapse in recruiting person who applied on the strength of a bogus/fake certificate and what action has taken ag against ainst erring officers who permitted such a recruitment to be made. For this, it would be necessary to examine the still larger issue that a Corporation of the State should turn against a candidate and terminate his services after 20 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 21 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters utilizing his services for 6 years. All these issues would need to be balanced out after receiving replies from the respective respondents and the one impleaded by Court.
Notice of motion, returnable by 18.10.2016.
Notice re: stay as well.
On the asking of Court, Mr. Haris Harishh Rathee, Sr. D.A.G.,Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the 5th respondent and waives service on the State. Mr. Bhardwaj to supply requisite number of the paper-books paper books in the Office of Advocate General Haryana with one advance copy to Mr. Rathee during th the course of the day.
Notice to the remaining respondents be issued through process dasti in addition to usual mode.
A copy of this order be given to Mr. Rathee attested by the Bench Secretary of this Court for onward transmission to the Chief Secretary, Secretary, Haryana for his immediate attention and affirmative action which may include blacklisting of bogus technical education institutions and publicizing action taken against then in the media so that students are forewarned not to seek admissions therein and an expect to land jobs in Government service and in State Corporations and Nigams."
17. While this Court may sympathise with the petitioner(s) regarding the delay, the settled law must prevail. The petitioner(s) misrepresented their eligibility by failing to ensure compliance with the expressly stated qualifications set out in their offer of appointment. This, however, does not imply the existence of mens rea on the part of the petitioner(s). In any event, mens rea is relevant only to criminal proceedings, and the absence thereof cannot shield the petitioner(s) from civil consequences. Since the very foundation of the petitioner(s)' employment stands vitiated by the use of certificates issued by unrecognised 21 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 22 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters institutions, they cannot claim entitlement to an any y benefits arising from such tainted service. As far as cases pertaining to employees who obtained the desired certification subsequent to their appointment are concerned, they would surely be entitled to benefits of the same for any future employment prospects pects but the same shall not suffice to justify reappointment. A similar observation has been made by a Coordinate bench in order dated 01.08.2018, with regards to the contractual employees who do not satisfy the essential requirements. The relevant part ooff the said order is reproduced below:
" All contractual appointments made without candidates holding essential advertised qualifications from recognized Universities/Technical Board/Institutes have no case for re- re appointment. In cases where contractual emp employees loyees have obtained degrees/diplomas/certificates from recognized institutes they may use such certificates for future recruitment in the respondent respondent-Nigam Nigam or elsewhere, a right which they would possess in any case."
CONCLUSION
18. In view of the discussion above, all the abovementioned petitions are dismissed being bereft of any merit. The petitioner(s) who acquired the requisite qualification from a recognised institution subsequent to the recruitment, can avail benefit of the same if they apply for fresh appointment, subject to applicable rules and regulations.
19. However, in the matter at hand, the fault in the qualification of the petitioner was identified 06 years post his recruitment. Such laxity displayed by the respondent-DHBVN respondent DHBVN cannot be condoned in any shape or 22 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 ::: 23 CWP-18580 18580-2016 2016 and other connected matters form. In Monu(supra), Monu(supra), the verification of certificate certificate-issuing issuing institution was completed after the petitioner therein had spent 07 years in service, only in pursuance of an order of this Court directing the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police to do the needful. Thus, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the Managing Director, DHBVN to formulate guidelines and issue instructions for verification of credentials of its employees within 06 months of their recruit recruitment.
20. A compliance affidavit in this regard be filed with the Registry within 03 months of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of this order also be supplied to learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent--DHBVNL for information ation and compliance.
21. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
22. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected cases.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE November 29, 2025 P.C Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No 23 of 23 ::: Downloaded on - 29-11-2025 21:40:58 :::