Asha Devi vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Lok Pal Singh, J

1          Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to call for the record of the case and quash the order dated 26.04.2018 passed by the respondent no.1 contained in annexure no.1 to the writ petition.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to consider the fresh Transfer Certificate dated 20.3.2018 issued by the respondent no.5 and counter signed by the respondent no.4 on 21.3.2018 for the purpose of service record of the petitioner.

iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned/appropriate authority to take action in accordance with law against the persons who committed the mischievous act in getting the counter sign District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad, U.P. over the transfer certificate of the petitioner issued by the respondent no.5.

Facts in brief are that the petitioner was appointed as Aanganbadi Sahayika vide order dated 20.12.2010. Thereafter, vide order dated 22.8.2013, she was promoted on the post of Aanganbadi Karkyakarti. According to the petitioner, she passed class 6th, 7th and 8th from Krishna Bal Vidya Mandir, Jalalpur, District Moradabad in the year 1991, 1992 and 1993 respectively. Thereafter she passed High School Examination as a private candidate in the year 2012 from the Board of High School and Intermediate Education. While seeking appointment for the post of Aangabadi Sahayika, the petitioner submitted her transfer certificate issued from the School from where she passed Class 8th examination. Said transfer certificate was issued by the Principal of the School, the respondent no.4, duly counter signed by the District Inspector of Schools Moradabad. One Dr. Sompal Singh Rana submitted an application dated 30.08.2017 under the Right to Information Act seeking information in respect of genuineness of the transfer certificate submitted by the petitioner alongwith her application for appointment on the post of Aanganbadi Sahayika. In reply, respondent no.3 vide his letter dated 22.9.2017 informed Dr. Sompal Singh that the transfer certificate is not counter signed by his office and that the number 4640 mentioned in the said transfer certificate is forged one. On the basis of information received from the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad, the respondent no.3 submitted a complaint to the respondent no.2 stating therein that the T.C. of class 8th as submitted by the petitioner is wrong. On the complaint, respondent no.2 issued a show cause notice to the petitioner and thereafter by impugned order dated 26.4.2018, terminated the services of the petitioner with immediate effect.

Respondent no.3 has filed the counter affidavit stating that the transfer certificate was not counter signed by the D.I.O.S. and as per the office records at the same number 4640 the transfer certificate to Saurav has been issued/counter signed. It is, however, stated that the respondent no.3 has issued the second transfer certificate dated 21.03.2018 to the petitioner after countersigning the same.

Petitioner has filed the rejoinder affidavit denying the averments made in the counter affidavit.

Despite opportunity, initially the respondent nos.3 and 4 did not file their counter affidavit, thus this Court, vide order dated 03.09.2019, constrained to pass an order for personal appearance of the respondent nos.3 and 4. In compliance thereof, Mr. Rajpal Singh, Principal, Krishan Public Uchtar Madhyamic School Jalapur, Moradabad and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dwivedi, District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad remained present in person before this Court on 03.09.2019. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dwivedi, D.I.O.S., Moradabad apprised the Court that Mr. Rajpal Singh, Principal issued a forged transfer certificate to the petitioner and that a Committee has been constituted to enquiry into the matter. Copy of the record of the case was taken on record. This Court perused the record. A perusal thereof would reveal that Principal issued a forged certificate to the petitioner, on his own, and there was no fault on the part of the petitioner. The credentials of the petitioners have been found genuine by this Court. Furthermore, services of the petitioner have been terminated without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In such circumstances, impugned order is liable to be set aside.

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 26.04.2018 is set aside. Petitioner shall be treated as continuing in service and shall be paid due remuneration.

No order as to costs.