High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Lal Bahadur Rawal v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 33481 of 2001  RD-AH 4771 (19 March 2007)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 33481 of 2001
Lal Bahadur Rawal---------------------------------------------Petitioner
State of U.P. and others-----------------------------------Respondents.
Hon'ble V.M. Sahai, J.
Hon'ble Shishir Kumar, J.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 29.9.2001, Annexure-16 to the writ petition, by which the petitioner's selection to the post of Principal has been cancelled by the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission, Allahabad (in brief Commission) on the ground that the petitioner has produced a forged no objection certificate.
The petitioner was appointed as lecturer (Geography) in R.S.M. College, Dhampur, Bijnor. He was also confirmed on 21.10.1979 as lecturer (Geography). On 31.1.1995 the Commission advertised the vacancy for the post of Principal. The petitioner applied for the same. His name was recommended and he was appointed as Principal S.M. College, Chandausi, Moradabad. On 23.3.1998 the petitioner resigned from the post of Principal and again joined the college of respondent no.4 on 1.7.1998 as lecturer (Geography). Another advertisement was issued by the Commission on 20.8.1998 for the post of Principal. The petitioner applied for the same and wrote a letter informing the Commission that no objection certificate granted from the college of respondent no.4 would be produced at the time of interview. The Commission called petitioner to appear in interview on 19.2.1999. The petitioner was selected for the post of Principal on 18.4.2001. The petitioner was recommended for being appointed as Principal in the college of respondent no.4. It appears that the Secretary of the college of respondent no.4 made a complaint to the Director that the no objection certificate was forged. The Director sent the complaint to the Commission. On the basis of that complaint the Commission made enquiry from the Secretary of the college of respondent no.4 who informed the Commission that his signature on the no objection certificate was forged. The Commission cancelled the selection of the petitioner on the ground that his no objection certificate was forged.
We have heard Sri R.N. Singh, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri A.K. Goyal for the petitioner, learned standing counsel appearing for respondents no.1 and 2, Sri H.N. Singh learned counsel appearing for respondent no.3 and Sri R.K. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4.
Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the Commission has produced the records before us. He has urged that no objection certificate was not issued by the Secretary of the college of respondent no.4 and the signatures on the no objection certificate that was issued to the petitioner was forged and fictitious.
We have gone through the no objection certificate issued by the college from the records produced before us. There is no discrepancy in the signature of the authority who had issued the no objection certificate. Word 'R' has been written in slightly different way. However, it does not appear to be forged and had been written by the same authority who had issued no objection certificate and made the complaint because the word 'Singh' is identical in the letters as all the strokes are identical and both the signatures are the same. The petitioner has written a letter to the Commission that the no objection certificate is genuine and the complaint made by the Secretary of the college of respondent no.4 is false and frivolous. We hold that the no objection certificate was issued by R. Singh, the Secretary of the college where the petitioner was working as lecturer and in the same college the petitioner has been placed as Principal. Since placement of the petitioner in the same college as Principal appears to have irked the Secretary, he made a false complaint to the Commission which has wrongly cancelled the selection of the petitioner on the basis of false and frivolous complaint of the Secretary of the college of respondent no.4. As such the order of the Commission selecting the petitioner as Principal of the college of respondent no.4 is liable to be upheld. The petitioner is entitled to be given placement as Principal in the college where he was recommended by the Commission at the time of selection and necessary placement orders be issued forthwith to the petitioner.
The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Orders dated 29.9.2001 and 24.8.2001 passed by respondents no.2 and 3, Annexures-16 and 21 to the writ petition are quashed. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondent no.2 to issue a fresh placement order placing the petitioner as Principal in R.S.M. Degree College, Dhampur, Bijnor within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before respondent no.2.
Parties shall bear their own costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.