Mamta Devi @ Mamta Kumari Suthar vs The State Of Rajasthan

@Judgmenttag-Judgment

Arun Monga, J

The petitioner herein is before this Court seeking quashing of an office order dated 18.05.2022 (Annex.8), vide which, respondents informed the petitioner that her appointment on the post of Anganbadi Kaarykarta, as per the order dated 11.05.2022, stands canceled on account of the fact that during document verification, her mark sheets of 10th and 12th grades were found to be from an unrecognized board.

Briefly speaking relevant facts as pleaded in the petition are that the petitioner, a widow with secondary and senior secondary qualifications from the Council of Open School Education, Rajasthan (registered by the Government of Rajasthan), applied for the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta in Banwal-I, Gram Panchayat Mayapur, following a vacancy notice issued by respondent No. 3, the Deputy Director of Child Development Services, Women and Child Development Department, Nagaur, on 01.11.2021. The petitioner submitted her application to respondent No. 4, the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Parbatsar, District Nagaur, on 09.11.2021, along with all required documents.

2.1. Through an RTI application, the petitioner learnt that Omaram, a ward member of Gram Panchayat Mayapur, had raised concerns about verifying the authenticity of her 12th-grade mark sheet, which was addressed by the CDPO in a letter dated 26.04.2022. This concern having been addressed, respondent No.4 appointed the petitioner to the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta Banwal-I on 11.05.2022, confirming that her 10th and 12th mark sheets had been verified.

2.2. After receiving the appointment order, the petitioner joined the post on 11.05.2022, as confirmed in her letter to respondent No. 4. However, on 18.05.2022, the petitioner was informed by respondent No. 4 that her appointment order was canceled pending an investigation into the authenticity of her 10th and 12th mark sheets. Hence, this petition.

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and have perused the case record.

The only question involved herein is whether the 10th/12th certificate obtained by the petitioner is from a recognized education board or not? Regarding this, following pointed stand has been taken by the respondents in their reply:-

“8. That the contents of para 7 of the writ petition are not accepted in the manner they are averred, hence denied. In this regard it is submitted by the humble answering respondents that on a bare perusal of the annexure-6 provided by the petitioner in this writ petition, it becomes clear that the condition no.7 specifically provides that :

“if the submitted educational qualifications and other documents are found to be fake, the department can terminate your appointment and remove you, and can take legal action against you.”

Therefore, it becomes clear that the office of CDPO, Parbatsar never accepted the veracity of the petitioner’s marksheet and made it clear that if the marksheets are found to be fake, the department can terminate the petitioner’s appointment.

xxx xxx xxx

That the contents of para 9 of the writ petition are not accepted in the manner they are averred, hence denied. In this regard, it is submitted by the humble answering respondents that CDPO, Parbatsar vide letter dated 04.05.2022, requested the Secretary, Rajasthan Secondary Education Board, Ajmer to verify the authenticity of the 10th and 12th mark sheets of Mrs. Mamta Devi, wife of Late Shri Jitendra Kumar. In response to the said letter, the Assistant Administrative Officer stated that the relevant mark sheets of Mrs. Mamta devi, wife of Late Shri Jitendra Kumar are not related to the Rajasthan Secondary Education Board, Ajmer vide letter dated 04.05.2022. A copy of the letter dated 04.05.2022 and letter dated 04.05.2022 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE-R/2 and ANNEXURE-R/3 respectively.

That it is further submitted that the Board of School Education, Haryana has prepared a list of Fake Education Board where on number 46 the name of the Council of Open Schooling Education Rajasthan, Suratgarh has been mentioned which clearly indicates that the certificates provided by the petitioner are fake and thus, irrelevant. This list is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE-R/4.

Therefore, in such scenario order dated 18.05.2022 was passed from the office of CDPO, Parbatsar until the authenticity of the marksheet is verified. Only after the said verification, selection will be considered in remuneration service. Since, the authenticity of the said marksheet cannot be verified anymore, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for remuneration service.”

On being questioned, learned counsel for the petitioner orally controverts the aforesaid stand in the reply stating that this is an after thought on the part of the respondents.

In the writ petition, no material has been appended to establish that the petitioner’s certificates are from a recognized board, other than the certificate itself, wherein a self-proclamation is made that the board is recognized by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). There is neither any notification from MHRD nor from the Rajasthan State Government nor from the School Education Board stating that the said institute is recognized. Merely because the certificate was initially verified by the respondents does not lend any credence to the petitioner’s claim that she obtained the certificate from a recognized board. Recognition must be granted by the competent recognizing agency, not the verifying officer who carried out such verification.

Be that as it may, I am inclined to accept the aforesaid stand taken by the respondents in their reply as no further affidavit and/ or rejoinder has been filed to controvert the same. In any case, disputed questions of facts as pleaded herein cannot be decided in exercise of extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court on the basis of self serving affidavits. Same require to be tried by way of framing issues and leading respective elaborate evidence in support thereof.

Petitioner is at liberty to take legal recourse before appropriate forum to establish that her educational qualifications are duly recognized and are not from an institute, which has been blacklisted.

As far as present writ petition is concerned, the same is dismissed with liberty as aforesaid.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.