Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.5301 OF 2013 =================================================== NAWAL KISHORE PASWAN, S/O MAUZE LAL PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE HAWAI ADDA, MASAN ROAD P.S + DISTRICT KATIHAR. .... .... PETITIONER/S VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 3.THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL BIHAR MILITARY POLICE, WESTERN REGION, MUZAFFARPUR. 4.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KATIHAR. 5.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KATIHAR. 6.THE COMMANDANT, BIHAR MILITARY POLICE 7, KATIHAR. .... .... RESPONDENT/S =================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s:Mr.Bidhan Chandra Jha, Adv. For the Respondent/s:Mr.P. Pratap GP-6. =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 2/ 02-04-2013 Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- to on the post appoint (i) For directing the the respondents petitioner of constable where the petitioner was earlier selected and started training and in the course of service after the verification of his certificate the petitioner was terminated from his service. (ii) For holding that the petitioner was penalized for the fault which was not done by the petitioner intentionally and had done according to the direction the officials of respondent department and the fault did not give any change in the position of the petitioner. the of (iii) For holding that the petitioner being a member of Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 2 and Economically socially backward class was trapped and taking benefit of his innocence, the petitioner was ousted from the service." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was an applicant against Advertisement No. 2 of 2004 for the post of constable and after his selection he was appointed temporarily on 08.08.2005 under the order of the Commandant, B.M.P-7, Katihar on the post of constable but subsequently his service was terminated on 16.12.2005 in a wholly arbitrary manner on the ground that the date of birth declared by the petitioner in his application filed for appointment on the post of constable in course of verification from Bihar School Examination Board was found to be false. 4. According to learned counsel for the petitioner such termination of the service of the petitioner was in violation of the principles of natural justice because the petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity to explain the whole thing. Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner kept on representing to his higher authorities against the order of
Facts
Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 3 termination dated 16.12.2005 but when he did not get relief from the respondents he has filed the present writ application on 11.3.2013. 5. In this case, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 6 and 7, wherein, it has been stated that not only the petitioner had filed his application disclosing his date of birth as 05.02.1970 but he had also produced the matriculation certificate showing his date of birth as 05.02.1970 but the forgery in the matriculation certificate was discovered in course of verification of the matriculation certificate of the petitioner and few others from Bihar School Examination Board which in response to the query had represented on 05.12.2005 that the date of birth of the petitioner in the records of the Bihar School Examination Board was 05.02.1969. 6. Learned Counsel for the State in this regard has also explained that in view of the aforesaid report of the Bihar School Examination Board and the own undertaking of the petitioner on the application form that if any declaration made by him was found to be Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 4 incorrect, he would become liable to be removed from service, the services of the petitioner were terminated. He has also submitted that it was not only in the case of the petitioner but also in the case of similarly situated persons like Nawal Kishore Paswan, Jitendra Kumar and Saroj Kumar were also subjected to termination of their services on discovery of their forged matriculation certificate disclosing false date of birth. 7. From the materials on record, this becomes clear that the services of the petitioner after his continuation for a period of more than fours months i.e. from 08.08.2005 to 16.12.2005 had come to an end way back in December-2005, itself and therefore, this writ application filed on 11.03.2013 is fit to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches alone. Mere filing of representation also cannot explain the delay of more than seven years in moving this Court. 8. This Court has also found from the records that both in the application filed by the petitioner and in the matriculation certificate there is a cutting and Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 5 interpolation as with regard to date of birth and the year 1969 has been scored over and written as 1970 by the petitioner himself by also putting his small initial signature on such cutting. Both such cutting therefore cannot be a mere co-incidence and in any event once the Bihar School Examination Board has declared that in the record of the Board, the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 05.02.1969, which is in conformity with the School Leaving Certificate of the petitioner,
Legal Reasoning
there would be no difficulty for this Court in holding that it was the petitioner who had made a misrepresentation about his age in the application filed by him seeking appointment on the post of constable and even the matriculation certificate was interpolated, inasmuch as, the date of birth of the petitioner was declared by him as 5.2.1970. 9. In that view of the matter, the petitioner was bound to suffer on account such misrepresentation relating to his date of birth in his application and had thus incurred the liabilty of being terminated from service in view of his own declaration given in his application, wherein, he had undertaken that:- Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 6 ?kks"k.kk&i= eSa izekf.kr djrk@djrh gwW fd mij nh xbZ lwpuk,a rFkk layXu izek.k&i= lgh gSA feF;k ik;s tkus ij esjh mEehnokjh ,oa fu;qfDr fcuk lwpuk ds jn~n dh tk ldrh gSA eSa ;g ?kks"k.kk djrk@djrh gwW fd esjs fo:n~/k Fkkus esa ;k U;k;ky; esa dksbZ QkStnkjh ekeyk yafcr ugha gSA uoy fd’kksj ikloku g0@& vkosnd dk iwjk gLrk{k uoy fd’kksj ikloku LFkku& dfVgkj fnukad 10. In view of the above, this Court does not find any error in the impugned order passed against the petitioner which reads as follows:- cykns’k izk:i 1456@05 uofu;qDr fl0 487 uoy fd’kksj ikloku fl0 62 ftrsUnz dqekj fl0 313 ljkst dqekj ,oa fl0 427 lekmu uoh dks flikgh ds in ij fu;qfDRk foKkiu la[;k 02@04 ds vkyksd esa fjfDr ds fo:n~/k fpfdRld }kjk ;ksX; ik;s tkus ds mijkUr vLFkk;h rkSj ij fnukad 08- 08-05 dks dh xbZ FkhA fu;qfDr ds i’pkr mDr pkjksa uo fu;qDr flikfg;ksa dh ’kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk eSfVzd ikl izek.k i= dh tkap bl dk;kZy; Kkikad 1703@eks0 fnukad 09-08-05 ,oa i=kad 2015@j- dk0 fnukad 23-9-05 ds }kjk lfpo fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr iVuk dks Hksth xbZ FkhA mi lfpo …fuxjkuh‰ fcgkj fo|ky; ijh{kk lfefr iVuk us vius i=kad 586@fnukad 05-12-05 ds }kjk uo fu;qDr flikfg;ksa dh ’kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk eSfVzd ikl izek.k i= dh lR;kiu dj lR;kfir izfrosnu bl dk;kZy; dks ykSVk;h xbZ gSA lR;kiu izfrosnu ,oa ewy eSfVzd ikl izek.k i=ksa ds voyksdu ls Li"V gS fd mDr pkjksa uo fu;qDr flikfg;ksa dh tUe frfFk esa fHkUurk gS& dk;kZ0 esa lefiZr cksMZ }kjk izek.ki= ds }kjk tUe frfFk lR;kfir tUe frfFk 1- uofu;qDr fl0 487 uoy fd’kksj ikloku & 05-2-70 05-2-69 2- uofu;qDr fl0 62 ftrsUnz dqekj & 16-3-81 16-3-80 3- uofu;qDr fl0 313 ljkst dqekj & 25-1-80 25-1-79 4- uofu;qDr fl0 427 lekmu uoh & 05-3-72 05-3-92 pwafd uo fu;qDr flikfg;ksa dh fu;qfDr gsrwq vkosnu izi= esa Li"V fd;k x;k gS fd muds }kjk lefiZr izek.k i=ksa esa ;fn Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 7 fdlh izdkj dh vfu;ferrk …=qfV‰ ik;h tkrh gS rks fcgu fdlh lwpuk ds lsok lekIr dj nh tk;sxhA mi;qZDr l’krZ uo fu;qDr fl0 487 uoy fd’kksj ikloku fl0 62 ftrsUnz fl0 313 ljkst dqekj ,oa fl0 427 lekmu uoh dks QthZ eSfVzd ikl izek.k i=@tUe frfFk esa fHkUurk ik;s tkus ds QyLo:i rRdky izHkko ls lsokP;wr fd;k tkrk gSA g0@& lekns"Vk fo0 lS0 iq0 7] dfVgkj 11. As would be noted that it was not only the petitioner and three other persons alike him who too had given a false declaration of their date of birth and about whom also similar report of Bihar School Examination Board that their matriculation certificate was reported to be forged, were also removed from service. 12. In view of above when the petitioner also does not deny the fact that his date of birth is actually 05.02.1969, this Court will have no hesitation in holding that the petitioner is not a fit person to be retained in police department. In any event there being no dispute at all that the date of birth of the petitioner is 05.02.1969 whereas he has declared his date of birth either in the application form or in the undertaking as 05.02.1970, he could not claim for any further liberty. Patna High Court CWJC No.5301 of 2013 (2) dt.02-04-2013 8 13. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner did not gain anything out of this change of date of birth from 05.02.1969 to 05.02.1970 is also to be only noted for its being rejected inasmuch as there was no question of any gain or loss but the question was one of integrity which a police constable must have. If a police constable enters in service on the basis of forged matriculation certificate, he cannot claim any compassion more so when he is also bound by his own undertaking given in the application that his services were liable to be terminated in the event of discovery of any information/document given by him to be false. 14. That being so, this Court does not find any merit in the application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)