AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.—Vide our order dated 26th October 2007, we had disposed of the Writ Petition but the Petitioners have persisted by taking out Motions as if the Writ Petition was pending. We direct that this Writ Petition is finally disposed of by following order and if the parties have any other grievance they would be at liberty to take steps in accordance with law and should not move applications in this disposed of matter.
Petitioner No. 1 claims that he is incharge Principal of Siddharth College of Law and a senior Professor. Petitioner No. 2 is stated to be a lawyer practicing in the High Court at Mumbai and before other Tribunals. Both these Petitioners have filed this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that the Court should stay the inquiry being conducted against the Respondents with further prayer that the services of Respondent No. 3, namely, Mrs. Chitra Salunkhe be ordered to be terminated as her degree is bogus. They have also prayed that in the interest of public the matter be entrusted to Central Bureau of Investigation for investigation of bogus degrees in circulation in the State of Maharashtra. The Petitioners submitted that Respondent No. 3 had obtained a B.A. Degree from Kakatia University, Warangal, Andhra Pradesh on the basis of which she has obtained eligibility certificate from the University of Mumbai in the year 198889 and got admission in the year 1987 for First Year LL. B. course in Siddharth Law College which was later on found to be a bogus degree. This fact, the Petitioners state, that they have confirmed and they even wrote to the Principal Secretary, Andhra Pradesh who confirmed vide letter dated 7th August 2006 that no entry of issuance such a degree to Respondent No. 3 existed. After completing the law, Respondent No. 3 passed LL.B. Examination in the year 2000 and was enrolled with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa on 15th December 2000. She was later on appointed as Director, Central Assessment Project for moderation of the answer books at the Law Examinations and later she was appointed as a Lecturer in the College. Her appointment was recommended to the Vice Chancellor by the Principal. Despite the fact of her bogus degree having been found, Respondent No. 2 and even other authorities are not taking any action in accordance with law. It is also averred in the Writ Petition that there are large number of such bogus degrees in circulation on the basis of which various persons have obtained employment in the State of Maharashtra and the Government is not taking appropriate action.
To this, reply affidavits have been filed by different Respondents. It has been stated in the affidavit filed on behalf of the State that private complaint has been filed before 8th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate who directed the investigation to be conducted against Respondent No. 3 and the investigation has been conducted. It is also noticed that from the documents on file, there are various persons involved in this racket for bogus certificates which required a detailed and in-depth investigation by the authorities concerned.
On behalf of the University, it has been stated that the eligibility certificate had been issued to Respondent No. 3 (wrongly referred to as Respondent No. 6) and the departmental inquiry had been initiated. The facts were verified by the senior officers of the University from Kakatia University. Subsequently, a report was received on 1st September 2006 and the University has issued a directive and a chargesheet has been served on 2nd March 2007 on Respondent No. 3 and the inquiry is in progress.
It is not necessary for us to go into the further details or factual matrix of the case arising from the pleadings of the parties in the present Writ Petition. It may be noticed that on 9th July 2007 it was stated before the Court on behalf of the University that the chargesheet has been served upon Respondent No. 3 and a retired Judge of this Court had been appointed as a Presiding Officer of the inquiry to be conducted against Respondent No. 3. On 26th October 2007, when the matter came up for hearing, certain statements were made on behalf of the Respondents and the Court passed the following order:
The learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 states that the management has taken a decision to conduct proper inquiry and they will immediately place respondent No. 3 under suspension and forthwith conduct inquiry, if necessary in accordance with law.
It has already been noticed in our previous order and at the cost of repetition we may notice that the inquiry ordered had already been started and even the University had found that the degree of respondent No. 3 is not valid and proper degree. In the light of this we hardly see any reason to delay the proceedings any further.
In view of the statement made by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 there is no need for this Court to keep this petition pending. However, we direct respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that while placing reliance upon the inquiry report which had already been conducted and documents referred thereto and annexed to the petition, the respondents would complete the inquiry against respondent No. 3 if they choose to do so, within 8 weeks from today.
The State Government, in the meanwhile, may also look into the grievance of the petitioner that there are large number of persons who obtained bogus degrees and who are in teaching profession. The learned AGP states that they would look into the matter and if necessary they would refer the matter to the Crime Branch. In view of the above statements, nothing survives in this petition and same is disposed of. Parties to abide by their statements. No order as to costs.
Thereafter the University prayed for some time to conclude the disciplinary inquiry against Respondent No. 3 and vide order dated 29th July 2008, time for concluding the disciplinary inquiry was extended by twelve weeks. Vide order dated 24th March 2009, while dealing with Notice of Motion No. 175 of 2009 filed by the applicants, the Court had permitted the two witnesses who had been produced to be cross-examined by the Petitioners on the next date of hearing fixed by the Presiding Officer and the inquiry was to be completed within the time fixed by the Court.
When the matter came up for hearing before the Court on 6th May 2009, the Court was informed by the learned Counsel appearing for the State as well as the University that the inquiry against Respondent No. 3 has been completed and the Inquiry Officer has submitted his report dated 1st April 2009. The Inquiry Officer found that Respondent No. 3 had not passed her B.A. Examination but also came to the conclusion that she had not played any fraud and with certain recommendations referred the matter to the competent authority of the University.
The learned Counsel appearing for the State submitted that the investigation in the criminal case is in progress and is likely to be concluded in the near future. It was also stated that the State has already looked into the entire aspect of the forged degrees and has assured the Court that they would take up the matters with utmost sincerity and at the earliest. The investigation would be conducted by a specialised team constituted by the State Government.
In view of the above, we pass the following directions:
(a) That the Competent Authority in the University of Mumbai shall pass final order in accordance with law as the report of the Inquiry Officer is stated to have been submitted to the said authority. The University shall proceed in accordance with law after giving opportunity to Respondent No. 3 to reply to the findings recorded in the inquiry proceedings by the Inquiry Officer. This shall be done within eight weeks from the date of pronouncement of this order.
(b) The Central Government is hereby directed to constitute a special team headed by a Police Officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police to examine all the cases of forged degrees which have already come to the notice of the State as well as other cases which have not been noticed as well. This inquiry will be conducted, both, on investigation of the cases already known as well as by further inquiring into the matters relating to obtaining of bogus degrees which are not known and about persons obtaining subsequent benefits in the State or other services in the State of Maharashtra on the basis of such bogus degrees.
There shall be no order as to costs.