Tahira Bano vs State and Others

Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.—Official respondents invited applications from the eligible candidates for selection against the post of Anganwadi

Workers on honarium basis for various Anganwadi Centres including Anganwadi Centre Wagay Mohalla, District Ganderbal in terms of

advertisement notice dated 14.12.2009. Petitioner being resident of Banday Bagh also applied for selection and engagement as Anganwadi

Worker. A panel was prepared by the official respondents, in which petitioner and respondent No. 5 were enlisted and objections were invited

from all the interested persons/candidates. Petitioner after noticing the name of respondent No. 5 in the panel immediately made a complaint that

respondent No. 5 is ineligible as she has not passed the matriculation examination, but has managed fake matriculation certificate, which she had

annexed with the application form. Petitioner also made various representations to the same effect to the official respondents, but neither any

inquiry was conducted nor candidature of respondent No. 5 was rejected. Official respondents, particularly respondent No. 3, was having interest

and being her favourite candidate, selected respondent No. 5 and issued the appointment order in her favour. Thereafter vide communication

dated 28.01.2010 (annexure ""F"" to the writ petition) respondent No. 2 directed respondent No. 4 to look into the matter, but despite that neither

any inquiry was conducted nor any action was drawn, constrained the petitioner to file the writ petition in hand with a prayer to quash the selection

of respondent No. 5 and select/appoint her against the said post.

Respondents 1 to 4 have filed reply. It is averred that petitioner had objected the selection of respondent No. 5 on the ground that she had

produced fake matriculation certificate and Child Development Project Officer, Ganderbal-re-spondent No. 3 immediately requested the

authorities of J&K State Board of School Education for verification and report, who submitted the report dated 24.01.2010 to the effect that the

matriculation certificate so produced is genuine. Respondent No. 5 resisted the petition by filing reply on the ground that she is matriculate and the

certificate produced is not fake, was meritorious and came to be rightly selected and the petitioner has no cause of action at all.

Vide order dated 21.02.2011 respondent No. 5 was asked to produce the original matriculation certificate and she accordingly produced the

same in the open court on 03.05.2011 and was taken on record.

The case came up for consideration on 05.05.2011 and during the course of consideration it was found that writ petitioner had taken the

matriculation examination conducted by the J&K State Board of School Education under two roll numbers viz 871273 and 871279. On noticing

the said fact, Sh. Mohd. Yousuf, learned counsel for the Board was asked to accept notice on behalf of Board and to produce all the relevant

record pertaining to respondent Shamima Aziz. Accordingly, the Board submitted the affidavit on 16.5.2011. It is apt to reproduce para-1 of the

said affidavit herein:

That in pursuance to order from the Hon'ble High Court of J&K at Srinagar, dated 05.05.2011, the record of two Roll Nos: viz, 871273,

871279 of 10th class examination, Annual Regular session: 2001, was consulted and as per the information tendered by the concerned Assistant

Secretary Verification (KD), supported by the Admission-cum-permission form, the candidate namely Shameema Aziz D/O Ab. Aziz Baba

bearing Roll No. 87 1273 has not qualified 10th class examination session: Annual Rcgular-2001.

In terms of the said affidavit, respondent Shamima Aziz has not qualified 10th class examination under Roll No. 871273, annual regular session

2001, but in the affidavit the Board had not given the information regarding taking the examination by respondent No. 5 under Roll No. 871279.

Accordingly again a direction was passed vide order dated 06.06.2011, whereby Board was asked to file fresh affidavit indicating whether

respondent No. 5 had appeared in the 10th class examination under Roll No. 871279 and also to submit verification report about annexure R1

filed by respondents 1 to 4 with their reply. Child Development Project Officer, Ganderbal was also asked to appear in person along with the

record and original copy of annexure R1. In terms of the said order, Dr. M.S. Baloria, Secretary to Board has filed affidavit. It is apt to reproduce

relevant portion of said affidavit herein.

That in pursuance to order from the Hon'ble High Court of J&K at Srinagar, dated 05.05.2011, the record of two Roll Nos. viz 871273 and

871279 of 10th Class Examination, Annual Regular 2001 was consulted and as per the information tendered by the concerned Assistant Secretary

Verification (KD) supported by the admission-cum-permission form, the candidate namely Shameema Aziz D/o Ab. Aziz Baba bearing Roll No.

871273 has not qualified 10th Class Examination Annual Regular 2001. She Could not clear three papers and was placed in reappear category.

That under Roll No. 871279 one Neighat Ali D/o Ali Mohd. appeared but could not clear two papers and was placed in reappear category, a

copy of relevant extract of result register and a copy of letter dated 11.05.2011 of concerned Assistant Secretary are annexed herewith as

annexure RI and RII.

That under the above dated orders of this Hon'ble Court authenticity of letter No. F-58 dated 24.01.2010 was ascertained. No such letter has

ever been issued by the Board, the same is therefore fake and forged.

CDPO was present in the court on 19.08.2011 along with the record and the original copy of so called verification report-R1.

Keeping in view the above said facts, it appears that respondent No. 5 has not qualified the matriculation examination under Roll No. 871273

but the certificate so produced by her, which is made part of the file, do disclose that she has qualified the examination. The certificate which

appears to have been issued under Roll No. 871279 is also not genuine for the reason that as per the report of Board one Neighat Ali had

appeared under the said roll number. The Board authorities have also reported that they have not sent any verification report annexed with the

reply of respondents 1 to 4 (annexure R1), the same is not genuine and forged one.

In the given circumstances, I deem it proper to admit the writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition is admitted and with the consensus of

learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

Prima facie it is found that respondent No. 5 was not matriculate at the relevant point of time and had produced fake certificate including

verification report (annexure R1 to the reply of respondents 1 to 4).

Viewed thus, the writ petition is allowed and the selection and appointment of respondent No. 5 is quashed. Respondents are directed to

consider the case of the petitioner provided she was eligible at the relevant point of time. Let consideration order be passed within a period of

three months from today in terms of the rules occupying the field at the relevant point of time read with eligibility of the writ petitioner. It is made

clear that if it is found that petitioner was not eligible, in that eventuality the respondents are at liberty to issue fresh advertisement notice under

rules.

Further, it is provided that CDPO, Ganderbal to lodge FIR before the Crime Branch within one week from today and Sr. Superintendent of

Police, Crime Branch is directed to register the case on the report of CDPO and conduct investigation. The investigation officer should not be less

than the rank of Dy. S.P., who shall ascertain who are the persons who were involved in the preparation of fake matriculation certificates and the

so called verification report (annexure R1 to the reply of respondents 1 to 4). The investigating officer shall also ascertain the role of

officials/employees of the office of respondents 3 & 4 including J&K State Board of School Education. He is also commanded to submit status of

the investigation after every fortnight to the Registrar Judicial of this Court.

CDPO is directed to submit the compliance report within one week from today before the Registrar Judicial of this Court.

Registry is also directed to send matriculation certificate produced by respondent No. 5 before this Court to Child Development Project

Officer, Ganderbal through their counsel Mr. Mir Suhail, enabling her to send the same along with other relevant record to the Crime Branch.

Registry is also directed to return the record to Mr. Mir Suhail.