Nitendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and others, praying for quashing of the impugned Of

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "1. Issue a Writ, order or Direction in the nature of CERTIORARI to quash the impugned First Information Report bearing Case Crime No.0005/2025 dated 07/01/2025 under Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station- Mahanagar, District- Lucknow, to the extent of petitioner only."

3. It is the case of the petitioners that they participated in the selection held by Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission (U.P.S.S.S.C.) in the year 2016 for Group-C posts, wherein 'O' Level Certificate issued by the National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (N.I.E.L.I.T.) was the requisite eligibility criteria. After verification of their certificates, the petitioners were issued appointment letters on their selection. However, on some complaint, an enquiry was instituted. As a result, the petitioners' salary was suddenly stopped on 21.08.2020.

4. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.25976(S/S) of 2020: Nitendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others, praying for quashing of the impugned OfÏce Memorandum dated 21.08.2020 passed by the Directorate of Internal Audit and Accounts. This Court initially passed an order on 04.01.2021 directing the respondent no.2 to show by way of an afÏdavit as to under which provision of law a direction had been issued to stop the salary of the newly selected Accountants while they were allowed to continue to work. Till date no counter afÏdavit has been filed in the said writ petition and it is still pending.

5. It has been argued that the respondent no.5 being annoyed has proceeded to pass an order on 09.02.2021 recommending cancellation of appointment of the petitioners on the post of Assistant Accountant. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed several writ petitions, namely, Writ Petition No.6617 (S/S) of 2021, Writ Petition No.6542 (S/S) of 2021 and Writ Petition No.8589 (S/S) 2021, which were allowed by this Court by orders dated 16.03.2021 and 28.07.2021. The cancellation of appointment orders were set aside and the respondent no.2 in the said writ petition was directed to pass a fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and to complete such enquiry within six weeks and it was further directed that the petitioners shall be treated to be in service and shall be paid regular monthly salary as well as arrears of salary.

6. The respondent no.5 initiated proceedings afresh and the petitioners submitted their reply with evidence enclosing their registration in 'O' level course being conducted by N.I.E.L.I.T. and other relevant documents. However, without holding a regular enquiry, the appointment of the petitioners was again cancelled on 29.10.2022. The N.I.E.L.I.T. did not participate in such enquiry. The petitioners approached this Court in several writ petitions, the leading case of which is Writ-A No.586 of 2022 and this Court was pleased to pass an order on 14.11.2024 allowing the writ petition, setting aside the cancellation order and remitting the matter back to the respondent no.2 to pass a fresh order within two months from the date a certified copy of the order dated 14.11.2024 is produced before him.

7. Now, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged alleging that petitioners have forged their 'O' level certificates, which were never issued by the N.I.E.L.I.T.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the lodging of the F.I.R. amounts to circumventing the orders of the High Court passed in Service Single jurisdiction in writ petitions filed by the petitioners challenging the orders of cancellation of appointment.

9. Learned A.G.A. has referred to the order dated 21.10.2021 that was passed initially cancelling the appointment of the petitioners after the Court had allowed Writ Petition No.6617 (S/S) of 2021 by its order dated 16.03.2021 directing to hold enquiry.

10. Learned counsel for the State Respondent has pointed out that paragraph-6 of the said order has mentioned the Directorate writing on 23.07.2021 to the petitioners regarding documentary evidence to be submitted by them and also talking on phone to the OfÏcer concerned at N.I.E.L.I.T. for sending necessary documentary evidence regarding verification of 'O' level certificates of the petitioners. The N.I.E.L.I.T. in response to the repeated correspondence has informed by its letter dated 31.07.2020 that petitioner Neetendra Kumar S/o Dev Prakash Dubey had not been issued 'O' level certificate Registration no.905056 dated 30.07.2014 by N.I.E.L.I.T.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, has argued that such order dated 21.10.2021 has already been set aside by this Court while allowing the writ petitions of the petitioners.

12. Learned counsel appearing for the State Respondent has pointed out that the Court had remanded the matter to the respondents to conduct a fresh enquiry only on the ground that the N.I.E.L.I.T. had not participated in the enquiry which was being held regarding the veracity of the 'O' level certificate produced by the petitioners to obtain appointment as Assistant Accountant. Whereas it is evident from the order dated 21.10.2021 itself that the N.I.E.L.I.T. had written on 31.07.2020 in response to the correspondence undertaken with it, and informed the Directorate that such 'O' level certificate had not been issued. The letter of the N.I.E.L.I.T. referred to in the order which has been set aside by the Court has not been set aside by the Court and Letter No.13(28)2016 DOEACC dated 31.07.2020 clearly says that the 'O' level certificate has not been issued to the petitioner Neetendra Kumar. Such letter has been made the basis of the impugned F.I.R.

13. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that there is no whisper about the letter sent by the N.I.E.L.I.T. in the F.I.R.

14. We have gone through the F.I.R. and we find that it is not necessary to make mention of the verification done by the N.I.E.L.I.T. as the F.I.R. is not an encyclopedia mentioning all details and documentary evidence in support thereof. The F.I.R. only says that petitioners have produced certificates from N.I.E.L.I.T. to obtain appointment as Assistant Accountants which could not be verified.

15. After having examined the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and going through the documents enclosed to the writ petition as also the F.I.R., we are of the opinion that the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence by the petitioners.

16. This writ petition is dismissed with the liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate Forum for any other remedy which may be available to them under the law. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Rahul RAHUL TRIPATHI RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "1. Issue a Writ, order or Direction in the nature of CERTIORARI to quash the impugned First Information Report bearing Case Crime No.0005/2025 dated 07/01/2025 under Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station- Mahanagar, District- Lucknow, to the extent of petitioner only."

3. It is the case of the petitioners that they participated in the selection held by Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission (U.P.S.S.S.C.) in the year 2016 for Group-C posts, wherein 'O' Level Certificate issued by the National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology (N.I.E.L.I.T.) was the requisite eligibility criteria. After verification of their certificates, the petitioners were issued appointment letters on their selection. However, on some complaint, an enquiry was instituted. As a result, the petitioners' salary was suddenly stopped on 21.08.2020.

4. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.25976(S/S) of 2020: Nitendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others, praying for quashing of the impugned OfÏce Memorandum dated 21.08.2020 passed by the Directorate of Internal Audit and Accounts. This Court initially passed an order on 04.01.2021 directing the respondent no.2 to show by way of an afÏdavit as to under which provision of law a direction had been issued to stop the salary of the newly selected Accountants while they were allowed to continue to work. Till date no counter afÏdavit has been filed in the said writ petition and it is still pending.

5. It has been argued that the respondent no.5 being annoyed has proceeded to pass an order on 09.02.2021 recommending cancellation of appointment of the petitioners on the post of Assistant Accountant. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed several writ petitions, namely, Writ Petition No.6617 (S/S) of 2021, Writ Petition No.6542 (S/S) of 2021 and Writ Petition No.8589 (S/S) 2021, which were allowed by this Court by orders dated 16.03.2021 and 28.07.2021. The cancellation of appointment orders were set aside and the respondent no.2 in the said writ petition was directed to pass a fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and to complete such enquiry within six weeks and it was further directed that the petitioners shall be treated to be in service and shall be paid regular monthly salary as well as arrears of salary.

6. The respondent no.5 initiated proceedings afresh and the petitioners submitted their reply with evidence enclosing their registration in 'O' level course being conducted by N.I.E.L.I.T. and other relevant documents. However, without holding a regular enquiry, the appointment of the petitioners was again cancelled on 29.10.2022. The N.I.E.L.I.T. did not participate in such enquiry. The petitioners approached this Court in several writ petitions, the leading case of which is Writ-A No.586 of 2022 and this Court was pleased to pass an order on 14.11.2024 allowing the writ petition, setting aside the cancellation order and remitting the matter back to the respondent no.2 to pass a fresh order within two months from the date a certified copy of the order dated 14.11.2024 is produced before him.

7. Now, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged alleging that petitioners have forged their 'O' level certificates, which were never issued by the N.I.E.L.I.T.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the lodging of the F.I.R. amounts to circumventing the orders of the High Court passed in Service Single jurisdiction in writ petitions filed by the petitioners challenging the orders of cancellation of appointment.

9. Learned A.G.A. has referred to the order dated 21.10.2021 that was passed initially cancelling the appointment of the petitioners after the Court had allowed Writ Petition No.6617 (S/S) of 2021 by its order dated 16.03.2021 directing to hold enquiry.

10. Learned counsel for the State Respondent has pointed out that paragraph-6 of the said order has mentioned the Directorate writing on 23.07.2021 to the petitioners regarding documentary evidence to be submitted by them and also talking on phone to the OfÏcer concerned at N.I.E.L.I.T. for sending necessary documentary evidence regarding verification of 'O' level certificates of the petitioners. The N.I.E.L.I.T. in response to the repeated correspondence has informed by its letter dated 31.07.2020 that petitioner Neetendra Kumar S/o Dev Prakash Dubey had not been issued 'O' level certificate Registration no.905056 dated 30.07.2014 by N.I.E.L.I.T.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, has argued that such order dated 21.10.2021 has already been set aside by this Court while allowing the writ petitions of the petitioners.

12. Learned counsel appearing for the State Respondent has pointed out that the Court had remanded the matter to the respondents to conduct a fresh enquiry only on the ground that the N.I.E.L.I.T. had not participated in the enquiry which was being held regarding the veracity of the 'O' level certificate produced by the petitioners to obtain appointment as Assistant Accountant. Whereas it is evident from the order dated 21.10.2021 itself that the N.I.E.L.I.T. had written on 31.07.2020 in response to the correspondence undertaken with it, and informed the Directorate that such 'O' level certificate had not been issued. The letter of the N.I.E.L.I.T. referred to in the order which has been set aside by the Court has not been set aside by the Court and Letter No.13(28)2016 DOEACC dated 31.07.2020 clearly says that the 'O' level certificate has not been issued to the petitioner Neetendra Kumar. Such letter has been made the basis of the impugned F.I.R.

13. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that there is no whisper about the letter sent by the N.I.E.L.I.T. in the F.I.R.

14. We have gone through the F.I.R. and we find that it is not necessary to make mention of the verification done by the N.I.E.L.I.T. as the F.I.R. is not an encyclopedia mentioning all details and documentary evidence in support thereof. The F.I.R. only says that petitioners have produced certificates from N.I.E.L.I.T. to obtain appointment as Assistant Accountants which could not be verified.

15. After having examined the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and going through the documents enclosed to the writ petition as also the F.I.R., we are of the opinion that the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence by the petitioners.

16. This writ petition is dismissed with the liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate Forum for any other remedy which may be available to them under the law. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Rahul RAHUL TRIPATHI RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench