JUDGMENT : B.L. Hansaria, C.J. - The petitioner applied for the post of Typist under the Reserve Bank of India on 25-6-1980. In the application form, as at Annexure-B, a statement was made that she had obtained 385 marks in aggregate in the Intermediate Examination. According to the Bank, along, with the application form, the petitioner had submitted a copy of the. mark-sheet obtained from the office of the Principal, Rama. Devi Women's College, Bhubaneswar. It showed that in English, she had secured 115 marks out of a total of 200-. It may be stated that one of the eligibility conditions for the Post of Typist was that the candidate must have obtained 45% of marks in English. Relying on the statement made by the petitioner, she was given appointment in the year 1981 m the past of Typist in which- post she was confirmed in 1983. Subsequently, the Bank, entertained a doubt about the authenticity of the claim of the petitioner that she had obtained 115 marks in English and she was called upon to submit her original mark- sheet, to which it was replied that the same had been misplaced. The Bank, thereafter communicated with the Principal of the aforesaid College and it: was ascertained that the petitioner had, in fact, obtained 65 marks in English and the aggregate marks obtained by her was 335. The same information was made available to the Bank by the University. Being thus satisfied that a false declaration had been made by the petitioner relating to marks- obtained by her in the Intermediate Examination, the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why her service should not be terminate in accordance with Condition No. ix of the appointment letter, The petitioner replied that she had submitted the mark-sheet issued by the University. No! being satisfied with the cause shown by the petitioner, her service came to be terminated on 23-11-1987. An appeal was preferred against the order of termination which came to be rejected in 1989 whereafter this Court has been approached In its writ jurisdiction. 2. No! being satisfied with the cause shown by the petitioner, her service came to be terminated on 23-11-1987. An appeal was preferred against the order of termination which came to be rejected in 1989 whereafter this Court has been approached In its writ jurisdiction. 2. Shri Das has urged that as the petitioner had relied on the mark-sheet issued by the University as at Annexure-I in which it was shown that she had obtained 115 marks in English out of 200 marks, it cannot be said that she had given any false declaration to attract the mischief of Clause ix of the appointment letter, The submission of Shri Rath) appearing for the Bank, however, is that reliance by the petitioner on Annexure-I to support her case .is an after-thought inasmuch as that document could not have been made available to the petitioner by 25-6-1980 on which date she had applied for the post of Typist because the application to the University for issuance of the mark-sheet had been made only on 5-7-1980. In this connection, our attention has been invited to Para 3(o) of the writ petition. As to this, the contention of Shri Das is that at the time of making the application, the petitioner was not called upon to submit the attested copy of mark-sheet and so no such document was annexed along with the application form. To support this contention, our attention is invited to Condition No. vii of the appointment letter which states that the candidate should produce, at the time of reporting for duty, certificates relating to educational qualifications. Shri Rath, however, strenuously . contends that as from the mark-sheet subsequently issued both by the Principal of the Women's College as we!! as the University authorities, it would appear that the petitioner had obtained only 65 marks in English, it has to be assumed by us that a wrong mark-sheet was obtained and she being the beneficiary, we should hold that she had a role to play in obtaining a false mark-sheet in this connection, our attention has been invited to Krupasindhu Mallik Vs. Orissa Board of Secondary Education and Others, in which a Division Bench of this Court held that in view of the racket operating in the Board of Secondary Education, it would not be unreasonable to hold that the beneficiaries had been parties in the unholy matter. 3. Orissa Board of Secondary Education and Others, in which a Division Bench of this Court held that in view of the racket operating in the Board of Secondary Education, it would not be unreasonable to hold that the beneficiaries had been parties in the unholy matter. 3. We have not thought it fit at this stage to express any opinion on the vital aspect of the case in as much as we find that a. criminal case against the petitioner is pending at the instance of the C. B. I. relating to forgery of mark-sheet. The Bank was, however, not unreasonable in taking the view that the petitioner had given-a false declaration in as much as the two authorities, namely, the Principal of the Women's College and the University, had informed it that the petitioner had obtained 65 marks in English as against her claim of 115. But then we are not prepared at this stage to come to a conclusion that Annexure-I, which shows the marks obtained by the petitioner in English as 115, is a forged document or that the petitioner had any role to play in obtaining this mark-sheet from the University. According to us, therefore, it is a fit case where the petitioner should be taken back in service without of course allowing her arrear salary and her continuance in the Bank would be decided by the result of the criminal case which is said to be pending against her. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. D.M. Patnaik, J. 5. I agree.