Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16029 of 2014 Petitioner :- Dhanpati Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J.
Shri K.K. Roy files counter affidavit on behalf of respondents no. 4 and 5. The same is taken on record.
Heard Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Mata Prasad, learned standing counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 3 and Shri K.K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents no. 4 and 5.
The petitioner is seeking quashing of the orders dated 30.10.2012 and 26.9.2007 whereby it has been held that the appointment of the petitioner in the College of respondents no.
4 and 5 is through a forged and fraudulent document. The contention of the petitioner is that the post in question was advertised in two news papers, namely, Dainik Jagran and Aaj on 23.2.2005. The petitioner was one of the candidates who applied for the said post. It is stated that he was selected and thereafter his matter was sent to the Regional Higher Education Officer, Agra-Aligarh Region, Agra for approval. By an order dated 11.2.2007 it is stated that the petitioner was granted approval and with this letter he appeared before the respondent no. 4 College and he was given appointment. Later on it was held that the letter of 1.2.2007 is a forged and fraudulent document as it had never been issued from the office of the Regional Higher Education Officer. The respondents took the stand that the letter no. 4940-42/2006-07 dated 1.2.2007 was issued in favour of one Rakshpal Singh, peon and not in favour of the petitioner and therefore the letter of the same number under which the petitioner was claiming appointment was a forged and fraudulent document.
The stand further taken by the respondents in the supplementary counter affidavit was that there was a ban on appointment against vacancies occurring after 1.4.2003 and therefore in any case the petitioner could not have been appointed. It is also stated that a ban was imposed by the G.O. dated 27.7.2004 as mentioned in the letter of the Regional Higher Education Officer dated 10.1.2005 though this letter does not in so many words state that there was a ban but nevertheless a reference to that effect has been made in the letter dated 11.5.2018, Annexure-2 to the supplementary counter affiavit.
Shri Sanjay Singh has referred to Annexure-1 of his supplementary rejoinder affidavit, which is a letter dated 29.7.2004 written by the Joint Director of Higher Education, Allahabad clearly stating in so many words that the ban with reference to the G.O. dated 27.7.2004 has been lifted. The contention of the petitioner is two folds that if the letter no. 4940-42/2006-07 dated 1.2.2007 was in respect of Rakshpal for some other College than the candidature of the petitioner still remains valid and open for consideration by the Regional Higher Education Officer irrespective of the fact as to whether the letter dated 1.2.2007 was sent by the Regional Higher Education Officer in favour of the petitioner or not which is denied by the respondents as having been issued. The other submission of Shri Sanjeev Singh is that since there was no ban, therefore, the claim of the petitioner in any case could have been considered.
Shri Mata Prasad, learned standing counsel, however, on instruction dated 22.5.2018 received, copy of which has also been passed on to the court, states that the Regional Higher Education Officer has not yet passed any order on the candidature of the petitioner for appointment against the vacancy notified by the respondent no. 4-College.
In this view of the matter, the respondent no. 3 now will have to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment against the vacancy notified for selection.
Shri Sanjeev Singh and Shri K.K. Roy further submit that under Chapter XX statute 3(4) of the first Statute of Agra University (now Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra) it is provided that if no approval is granted within two months, such approval would be deemed to have been granted. In this view of the matter, in any case the petitioner would be entitled for appointment.
For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned orders dated 30.10.2012 and 26.9.2007 are quashed. The writ petition is allowed.
The respondent no. 4 shall take necessary steps to pass appropriate orders in the matter of the petitioner in view of deemed approval in terms of the Chapter XX statute 3(4) of the first Statute of Agra University (now Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra) within two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 o.k.