Patna High Court
Case Details
Patna High Court CWJC No.612 of 2013 (3) dt.16-01-2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.612 of 2013 ================================================== Sangita Kumari Wife Of Sri Awadhesh Yadav Resident Of Village- Kachra, P.S. Wena, Dist.- Nalanda .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State Of Bihar Through Secretary, Department Of Social Welfare, Government Of Bihar, Patna 2.The Director, I.C.D.S. Directorate, Social Welfare Department, Patna 3.The Commissioner Patna Division, Patna 4.The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Nalanda 5.The District Programme Officer, Nalanda 6.The Children Development Project Officer, Chandi, Nalanda 7.Sangita Kumari W/O Sri Gurymani Kumar, Resident Of Village Kachra, P.S. Wena, Dist.- Nalanda. .... .... Respondent/s =================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s:Mr. Birendra Kumar For the Respondent/s:Mr.Rakesh Kr Samrendra SC-21 =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 3/ 16-01-2013 Having heard counsel for the parties as with regard to the following relief prayed in this writ application:- "(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 14.6.12 passed by learned District Magistrate, Nalanda in Misc. Case no. 97/12 whereby and whereunder candidate petitioner from the post of Anganbari Sevika at Anganbari Centre, Kachra No. 2 and also direction has been issued to select the Respondent no. 7 in place of petitioner. (ii) For further commanding the respondents that after cancellation of aforesaid order dated 14.6.12 passed by
Legal Reasoning
Patna High Court CWJC No.612 of 2013 (3) dt.16-01-2013 learned District Magistrate, Nalanda in Misc. Case no. 97/12 to select the petitioner Sangita Kumari who is at first position in merit list." this Court must hold that there is no error in the impugned order dated 14.6.2012 (Annexure- 4) passed by the Collector of Nalanda district who has recorded the following findings:- ^^mHk; i{k dks lquus] vfHkys[k ij miyC/k dkxtkrksa ds ifjf’kyu ,oa lksfu;k dqekjh] efgyk i;Zosf{kdk ds tkap izfrosnu esas Li"V mYys[k fd;k x;k gS fd izFke LFkku izkIr vH;FkhZ laxhrk dqekjh dk eSfVzd dk izek.k i= tkyh gS og i<+uk&fy[kuk fcYdqy ugha tkurh gS] flQZ viuk uke fy[k ldrh gSA tkap izfrosnu esa ;g Hkh vaafdr fd;k x;k gS fd izFke LFkku izkIr efgyk xyr rjhds ls viuk uke cnydj ljdkjh ykHk mBk jgh gS ,oa mBkuk pkgrh gSaA lkFk gh m"kk nsoh ernkrk igpku i= ds vuqlkj mez yxHkx 44 o"kZ gS] tcfd laxhrk dqekjh ds eSfVzd izek.k i= ds vuqlkj mez yxHkx 23 o"kZ gSA Li"V gS fd lsfodk ds p;u gsrq es?kk lqph esa izFke LFkku izkIr vH;FkhZ laxhrk dqekjh QthZ efgyk gS] >wB tkylkth ,oa QthZ izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij ljdkjh ykHk ds lkFk lsfodk dk in ysuk pkgrh gS ftlds fo:n~/k dkuwuh dkjZokbZ djus gsrq izfrosfnr gSA Li"V gS fd laxhrk dqekjh }kjk tkylkth ds rgr tkyh izek.k i= izLrqr dj ,oa uke cnydj vkaxuckM+h lsfodk ds in ij p;u djkus ds m|s’; ls vkosnu lefiZr fd;k x;k ,oa mDr vkosnu ds vk/kkj ij es?kk lwph izdkf’kr dh x;h ftlesa foi{kh laxhrk dqekjh ifr vo/ks’k ;kno dks izFke LFkku ij jgus dh fLFkfr esa vkaxuckM+h lsfodk ds p;u gsrq ;ksX; ugha gSA vr% mijksDr of.kZr rF;ksa ds lE;d fopkjksijkUr ;g ikrk gwW fd foi{kh laxhrk dqekjh] ifr vo/ks’k ;kno xzke dpjk] iks0&HksfM+;k] Fkkuk osuk] ftyk ukyank }kjk vkaxuckM+h lsfodk ds p;u gsrq tkyh ’kS{kf.kd izek.k i= izLrqr fd;k x;k ,oa mudk uke m"kk nsoh rFkk bl uke ls muds }kjk ljdkjh ykHk Hkh izkIr fd;k gSA] ftlls muds lafnX/k pfj= dks n’kkZrk gS rFkk muds }kjk tkyh izek.k i= izLrqr dj lafodk ds in ij p;u djkus ds m|s’; ls vkosnu lefiZr fd;k x;k ftlds vk/kkj ij es?kk lwph esa izFke LFkku izkIr fd;k x;k gSA bl izdkj ifjoknh laxhrk dqekjh] ifr lw;Ze.kh izlkn] xzke&dpjk iks0 Patna High Court CWJC No.612 of 2013 (3) dt.16-01-2013 HksfM+;k] Fkkuk osuk] ftyk&ukyank es?kk lwph esa f}rh; LFkku izkIr jgus dh fLFkfr esa mudk p;u fd;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSa cky fodkl ifj;kstuk inkf/kdkjh] p.Mh dks vkns’k fn;k tkrk gS fd iwoZ ls izdkf’kr es?kk lwph ls gh vH;FkhZ dk p;u ekxZnf’kZdk 2011 esa fufgr izko/kkuksa ,oa foHkkxh; ifji=ksa ds vkyksd esa p;u dh dkjZokbZ ,d ekg ds vUnj iw.kZ djkuk lqfuf’pr djsaxsaA lkFk gh tkyh izek.k i= izLrqr djus ds vkjksi eas es?kk lwph esa izFke LFkku izkIr vH;FkhZ laxhrk dqekjh] ifr vo/ks’k izlkn] xzke dpjk] iks0&HksfM+;k] Fkkuk osuk] ftyk ukyank ds fo:n~/k izkFkfedh ntZ djsaA vkns’k dh izfr lHkh lEcaf/kr dks HkstsaA bl vkns’k ds lkFk okn dh dk;Zokgh lekIr dh tkrh gSA** (underlining for emphasis) It has to be also taken into account that this Court having noticed the underlined findings recorded in aforementioned impugned order holding the petitioner to be wholly illiterate and in capable of even reading and writing, had directed for her personal appearance by an order dated 11.01.2013 but learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that despite information being given to the petitioner she has not chosen to appear. Such conduct of the petitioner therefore, would be reflective of the fact that she is actually illiterate and had produced forged certificate of educational qualification at the time of her appointment. In that view of the matter, the finding of the Collector of Nalanda district on this score in the impugned order does not suffer from any Patna High Court CWJC No.612 of 2013 (3) dt.16-01-2013 infirmity. The next submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a valid certificate of Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board showing the petitioner to have passed the Madhyama examination and, therefore, there was no fraud played on the part of the petitioner has to be only noted for its being rejected. The allegation against the petitioner is one of impersonation and production of a forged matriculation certificate and not Madhyama Certificate. Such allegation in fact also attracts ingredients of committing of criminal offence, and therefore, once the petitioner’s fraudulent conduct is itself primafacie established, there would be no difficulty in approving the impugned order of termination of her service. The remaining submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that an Anganbari Sevika is not supposed to be a scholar seems to be desperate one inasmuch as an Anganbari Sevika has to be at least a literate person possessing requisite qualification of Matriculation as per the Government guidelines. If the petitioner therefore had Patna High Court CWJC No.612 of 2013 (3) dt.16-01-2013 produced the forged marksheet and ultimately when it has come in light that she cannot even read and write a single word no discretion can be exercised by such person for saving her appointment on the post of Anganbari Sevika. That being so, this application is devoid of any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. With a direction to the Collector of the district to ensure that his orders as with regard to institution of a FIR against the petitioner if not carried out till now in view of pendency of this writ application, the same must be complied forthwith by the Respondent no. 6, the C.D.P.O., Chandi Nalanda by instituting a First Information Report against the petitioner and other erring persons within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observation and direction this writ application is dismissed. Let a copy of this order be sent to Respondent no. 4, the District Magistrate, Nalanda (Respondent no. 4). Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)