RAM BINOD CHOUDHARY v. STATE OF BIHAR

Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Prayer in this writ application, reads as follows : - "That in present writ application petitioner prays for issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the office order no. 134 dated 25.04.2003 issued vide Memo no. 1011 dated 25.4.2003 by respondent no. 2 whereby and whereunder petitioner has been dismissed from service with direction to respondent no. 3 to recover the payment already revised by petitioner and further directed to lodge F.I.R. against him. The petitioner further prays for reinstatement in service with all monetary benefits and pass such other orders for which petitioner is entitled." The aforesaid impugned order infact reads as fcgkj ljdkj ;kstuk ,oa fodkl foHkkx Alkaf[;dh ,oa ewY;kadu funs'kky;A dk0vk0 la&LFkk-3@fu-4&1150 134 @iVuk] fnukad 25@4@03 funs'kky; ds vkns'k la[;k&393 AKkikad&1563A fnukad 29@6@1990 ds }kjk Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh dh fu;qfDr dj va/kjkBk<+h iz[k.M] e/kqcuh esa inLFkkfir fd;k x;k FkkA {kneuke /kkj.k dj dbZ O;fDr;ksa dks ladyd ,oa duh; lkaf[;dh lgk;d ds in ij dk;Zjr ik;k x;k vkSj Nkuchu ds i'pkr mUgsa lsokeqDr Hkh fd;k x;kA mlh dze esa Hkh jke fouksn pkS/kjh dh oRrZeku esa duh; lkaf[;dh lgk;d ds in ij leLrhiqj uxjikfydk esa dk;Zjr gS dh fu;qfDr ds ekeys dh Hkh tkap dh x;hA follows:- 2 2& Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh dh bl funs'kky; ds i=kad 467 fnukad 21@2@2003 ds }kjk mu lHkh vfHkys[kksa ds lkFk funs'kky; esa mifLFkr gksus dk vkns'k fn;k x;k] ftuls ;g izekf.kr gks lds fd os voj lsok p;u i"kZn esa vkosnudRrkZ Fks vkSj mUkgksaus izfr;ksfxrk ijh{kk esa Hkkx ysdj mrhZ.krk izkIr dh FkhA lkFk gh lkaf[;dh ,oa ewY;kadu foHkkx funs'kky; }kjk mUgsa fu;qwfDr ds laca/k esa Hksts x, ewy i=ksa AfyQkQk lfgrA dh Hkh ekax dh x;hA mUgasa mlds gh vuqjks/k ij rhu pkj vfrfjDr le; fn;k x;k rkfd os bu vfHkys[kksa dh funs'kky; esa tkap ds fy, mifLFkfr dj ldsA ijUrq muds }kjk bu vfHkys[kksa dks miLFkkfir djus esa viuh vleFkZrk O;Dr dh x;hA 3& funs'kky; esa miyC/k vfHkys[kksa dh tksp ls ;g Li"V gqvk fd& ¿AÀ fu;qfDr gsrq Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh }kjk voj lsok p;u i"kZn dh lefiZr Vafdr vkosnu&i= ek= ,d iw"B dk gh gS vkSj ml ij u rks voj lsok p;u i"kZn ds fdlh Hkh inkf/kdkjh dk gLrk{kj gS vkSj uk gh ewgjA ¿AAÀ fu;qfDr gsrq miyC/k vkosnu&i= ij izfof"V;ksa dh gLrfyfi ,oa gLrk{kj oRrZeku esa rFkkdfFkr Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh] duh; lkaf[;dh lgk;d ds gLrk{kj@gLrfyfi ls fHkUu gSA ¿AAAÀ Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh ds vkosnu&i= esa LFkk;h irk ,oa oRrZeku esa dk;Zjr rFkkdfFkr Jh pkS/kjh dh lsokiqfLr esa fn;k x;k LFkk;h irk fHkUu&fHkUu gSA 4& mi;qZDr rF;ksa ls ;g Li"V gks x;k gS fd rFkkdfFkr Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh] duh; lkaf[;dh lgk;d] leLrhiqj uxjikfydk {kneuke /kkj.k dj ljdkjh lsok esa jgdj vukf/kdkfjd :i ls osru vkgj.k djrs jgs gSA vr,o Jh pkS/kjh dks rkRdkfyd izHkko ls duh; lkaf[;dh lgk;d ds in ls lsok eqDr fd;k tkrk gSA 5& Jh pkS/kjh }kjk vkgfjr jkf'k dh olwyh dh dkjZokbZ ftyk lkaf[;dh inkf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj ds }kjk dh tk;sxhA Jh pkS/kjh ds fo:n~/k LFkkuh; Fkkuk esa izkFkfedh ntZ djus dh dkjZokbZ Hkh ftk lkaf[;dh inkf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj }kjk gh vfoyEo dh tk,xhA g0@& vLi"V 24@4@2003 funs'kd Kkikad 1011 iVuk] fnukad 25@4@2003 izfrfyfi& 1- ftyk inkf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj 2- ftyk dks"kkxkj inkf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj 3- ftyk lkaf[;dh inkf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj@ize.Myh; mi funs'kd Alkaf[;dhA] njHkaxk ize.My] njHkaxk 4- fo'ks"k inkf/kdkjh] uxj ifj"kn] leLrhiqj 5- Jh jke fouksn pkS/kjh] duh; lkaf[;dh lgk;d] leLrhiqj uxj ifj"kn] leLrhiqjA xzke + iksLV&osylUMh] Fkkuk&pdegs"kh] ftyk&leLrhiqj dks lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dkjZokbZ gsrq izsf"krA g0@& vLi"V 24@4@2003 funs'kd Kkikad 1011 iVuk] fnukad 25@4@2003 3 izfrfyfi& 1- lfpo] ;kstuk ,oa fodkl foHkkx] fcgkj] iVuk 2- lfpo] xwg Afo'ks"kA foHkkx] fcgkj] iVukA 3- lfpo] dkfeZd ,oa iz'kklfud lq/kkj foHkkx] fcgkj] iVuk 4- lfpo] fcgkj yksd lsok vk;ksx] fcgkj] iVuk 5- la;qDr funs'kd Aiz'kkluA@ojh; la;qDr funs'kd] lkaf[;dh ewY;kadu funs'kky;] fcgkj] iVuk 6- Jh iznhi dqekj flag] izHkkjh lgk;d Axksiuh;A eq[;ky; iVuk dks lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dkjZokbZ gsrq izsf"krA g0@& vLi"V 24@4@2003 funs'kd The dispute of the present nature as to whether the petitioner had obtained his appointment in person in a bonafide manner or some other person had impersonated him by practicing fraud and/or with the help of forged document, cannot be decided by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The question as to who is that Ram Binod Choudhary, said to have actually appeared in the examination and also allegedly been recommended by the Subordinate Service Selection Board for appointment, whether the petitioner or someone else, can be effectively decided only with the help of evidence by both the parties. The petitioner was asked to produce the document showing deposit of such form in the Board, admit card issued to him and the other connected document but that was not done and the petitioner had only produced his appointment letter and educational certificates which were never in controversy. The respondents have explained in their counter affidavit, by annexing a document, Annexure-A, an alleged application of the petitioner, that it did not contain all the required information in the prescribed 4 proforma nor was it ever received in the office of Commission and that such a fake copy was sought to be introduced by giving a false address which was later on changed by the petitioner in his service book. All these jinxed questionel of facts relating to appointment the petitioner on the basis of forged and fabricated document/information, cannot be gone into within the summary jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, if so advised, may still file a Civil Suit before a competent civil court to substantiate his case of his appointment being genuine and valid in the eye of law and by also seeking a declaration of the impugned order of termination of his service dated 25.4.2003 being both void and inoperative. When the aforementioned observations were made, the counsel for the petitioner had sought leave to withdraw this writ application in order to enable the petitioner to file a civil suit. The writ application is accordingly permitted to be withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)