VIRENDRA NATH DUBEY v. STATE OF U P — 1997 DIGILAW 903 (ALL)

PALOK BASU, J. The petitioner, Virendra Nath Dubey and two other petitioners challenge the orders dated 14-1-97 passed by the Director of Ayurvedic and Unani Services, U. P. Lucknow (for short the Director) by which the petitioners services have been terminated. The petitioners al lege to have been appointed as Pharmacists, a Class III post, by the Ayurvedic Direc torate of the State of U. P. 2. At the very outset it may be pointed out that according to the admitted stand of the State, there was collosal illegal withdrawal from State exchequer without budgetary allocation by persons connected with Ayurved and Unani Department in cluding the then Director the Late Dr. Shiv Raj Singh and various Government offi cials. It now appears that issuing illegal ap pointment letters to a large number of per sons without any post or vacancy was another act of criminal activity and illegal earning by the then Director and some offi cials. C. B. I. has already charge-sheeted seven accused in the "scam" including the then Health Minister and the then Secretary. Investigation regarding ancillary matters is going on regarding which perio dical reports are being submitted by the C. B. I. to this Court. The State Government it appears, has simultaneously taken up the exercise of finding out the cases of fake/forged appointment letters to various persons and it has been indicated by the State that these three cases fall in the category of wholly illegal appointments without any post, vacancy or advertisement and no record concerning these alleged ap pointments is available at the Directorate. 3. Sri S. K. Kalia learned Counsel for the petitioner assisted by Sri Y. K. Misra have been heard at considerable length. In opposition Sri R. K. Singh, Addl. Advocate General assisted by Sri A. K. Verma have also been heard at equal length. Affidavits have been exchanged and the writ petitions are being finally disposed of at the admis sion stage as prayed. All the petitioners have pleaded in these writ petitions that they nave been validly appointed and therefore, the impugned orders are illegal for various reasons, all of which has been denied by learned Addl. Advocate General. 4. It appears that the State Govern ment had initially passed some order on 17-6-92 as a result of which the daily wage appointments were done away with. Advocate General. 4. It appears that the State Govern ment had initially passed some order on 17-6-92 as a result of which the daily wage appointments were done away with. This saw several writ petitions being filed in the High Court and termination orders of those employees appears to have been interfered with. The State Government issued another order, dated 2-3-93 commanding the Direc tor to absorb (i. e. SAMAYOJAN) those daily wage employees in Class III and Class IV against the available vacant posts in the department. 5. Petitioner, Virendra Nath Dubey al leges to have been appointed as a daily wager in Ayurvedic Hospital, Ratnupur, District Jaunpur. It is further alleged by him that several persons were regularised in view of the aforesaid G. O. dated 2-3-93 and therefore, having come to know that, he made a representation for being similarly regularised. The Government did not pass any order and this inertia on the part of the Government/directorate compelled the petitioner to join hands with the other two petitioners who were similarly placed, to file writ petition No. 5258 (S/s) of 1994, Ajai Kumar Srivastava v. State of U. P. and others, in (the Lucknow Bench of) this Court. This writ petition was finally disposed of by Honble Single Judge on 2-11-94. A copy of the said order which has been annexed as Annexure- II to the writ petition indicates that the petitioners representation was directed to be decided by the State i. e. the Directorate. The petitioner alleges that he produced the certified copy of the order dated 2-11- 94 before the Director whereafter the Director passed an order dated 15-12-94 posting the petitioner to Aligarh absorbing him against a vacant post there. A copy of the said order dated 15-12-94 has been filed as Annexure III to the writ petition. In paragraph 12 of the writ petition the petitioner makes the following aver ments: "that the petitioner submitted his joining to the Regional Ayurvedic and Unani Officer Aligarh and on the information given by the Regional Officer Aligarh, the Opposite Party No. 2 vide his order dated 1-2- 95 modified his earlier order as contained in Annexure-II to the extent that the petitioner will take over the charge at State Ayurvedichospitalshahganj, Jaunpur. A true copy of the order is being filed herewith as Annexure-IV to this writ petition. " 6. A true copy of the order is being filed herewith as Annexure-IV to this writ petition. " 6. Thereafter the petitioner alleges that on 2-2-95 he took over charge of the post at Shahganj, Jaunpur. Copy of the order dated 2-2-95 has been filed as Annexures V and VI respectively indicating/al legedly that the petitioner was validly ab sorbed in the office at Jaunpur. In para graphs No. 15, 16, 17 and 18 the petitioner has pleaded that he had worked well during the terms of his employment; some similarly situated persons are working in the Direc torate; regularisation of persons like the petitioner has been done and this Court has passed some interim orders concerning similarly placed officials; on the aforesaid pleadings the petitioner has prayed that a writ in the nature of certiorari should issue quashing the termination order, dated 14-1-97 and a mandamus should also go com manding the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to work on the post of Pharmacist and pay the salary whenever it falls due. 7. A counter-affidavit was filed by the opposite parties in which practically every word that has been stated by the petitioner, has been strongly denied and categorically refuted. It may be useful to pick up some relevant averments in the counter-affidavit and quote them here so as to know the position of the then Director and Direc torate concerning the appointment of the petitioner:- "that it is stated that in view of the fact that the answering opposite parties were not aware of fake and forged appointments being made and also the conspiracy of the then Director Dr. Shiv Raj Singh in making forged appointments, at that time the correct facts could not be placed either before the State Government or before the Honble Court, but when the matter came in the light that several employees on the post of Phar macist, Class III and Class IV posts are working on the basis of fake, forged appointment orders al leged to be issued by Dr. Shiv Raj Singh, the necessary action is being taken by the Director Ayurvedic and Unani Services for cancelling the fake orders of appointment which have never been issued/despatched from the office of Direc torate Ayurvedic and Unani Services. Shiv Raj Singh, the necessary action is being taken by the Director Ayurvedic and Unani Services for cancelling the fake orders of appointment which have never been issued/despatched from the office of Direc torate Ayurvedic and Unani Services. It is also pertinent to mention here that on the basis of forged, fake appointment letters several persons got interim orders/final orders and taking the shel ter of the compliance of the orders of the Honble Court without bringing the correct facts before the Honble Court, the earlier engagement as daily wager has been made as regular by forging another appointment letter. The answering op posite parties can produce relevant records before the Honble Court establishing the fact that the appointment letters alleged to be issued by the then Director Dr. Shiv Raj Singh have never been issued or despatched. It is pertinent to mention here that the post of Pharmacist is a post within the purview of U. P. Subordinate Service Commis sion and when the alleged appointment letters have been alleged to be issued, there was com plete ban on appointment of daily wagers. . . . . . The then Director never made any effort to oppose or contest the cases for reason best known to the then Director, Dr. Shiv Raj Singh. In view of the aforesaid, it is stated that several financial irregularities committed during the period of Dr. Shiv Raj Singh came in the light of Directorate and it revealed that some sort of scam and ir regularities have also been committed relating to illegal and fake appointments, the matter was inquired and after making enquiry the appoint ment of the-petitioner having found to be fake and fraudulent and having been further found that they have never been issued from the office of the Directorate as they are not endorsed on the Despatch Register of the Directorate, the alleged appointment has been cancelled. " 8. In view of what has been incor porated above from the counter- affidavit riled by the opposite parties, the stand of the State of U. P. and the Directorate is that the entire action of the petitioner was fraudulent and that the then Director the late Dr. " 8. In view of what has been incor porated above from the counter- affidavit riled by the opposite parties, the stand of the State of U. P. and the Directorate is that the entire action of the petitioner was fraudulent and that the then Director the late Dr. Shiv Raj Singh had colluded with the petitioner in order to induct him from the back door in a manner de hors the provisions of the Rules without making any reference to the U. P. Subordinate Service Commission and also without making any advertisement for the recruitment to the vacant posts. 9. The stand of the State and the Direc torate on the question of following the directions and order of this Court have also been made very clear in the counter-af fidavit and that is that at no point of time did the petitioner obtain any interim relief from this Court. There was no direction by this Court to regularise the petitioners. The order, dated 2-11-1994 required only the representation of the petitioners to be dis posed of. It was strongly contended on be half of the respondents that the then Direc tor curiously enough, without deciding the representation as directed by this Courts order, issued an appointment letter firstly posting the petitioner allegedly at Aligarh and then in another collusive move shifting the place of posting to Jaunpur. It was can vassed on behalf of the respondents that the type of orders which have been passed by the Director are unknown in the history of the Directorate. No record of the three petitioners is available in the Directorate. It appears that the act of passing illegal, irregular and fraudulent orders is only the individual activity of the then Director in collusion with other officials which has deprived employment to those meritorious candidates who may have been waiting for opportunity like law abiding citizens. In this connection it was also agreed that such il legal orders cannot create any right on the petitioners and do not bind the State Government at all. 10. Sri Kalia has, however, vehemently argued three points in support of the petitioners. First, the petitioners appoint ment was against vacant post and therefore, the State Government cannot in the im pugned order say that they will not consider the petitioners continuance in view of the earlier G. O. dated 2-3-93. 10. Sri Kalia has, however, vehemently argued three points in support of the petitioners. First, the petitioners appoint ment was against vacant post and therefore, the State Government cannot in the im pugned order say that they will not consider the petitioners continuance in view of the earlier G. O. dated 2-3-93. Second, that the petitioners appointment letter and modified appointment letter were both is sued by the Director who was the authority/officer competent to make the ap pointment and therefore, the State Govern ment should honour the appointment letter and it is not open to either the State or the Directorate to say that just because no order or regularisation was passed the appoint ments should be treated as void or colourable. Third, the petitioners termina tion order has been passed in total dis obedience to the principles of natural jus tice and, therefore, this Court should inter fere and quash the termination orders. 11. As usual, all these three arguments have been strenuously opposed by Sri R. K. Singh, Addl. Advocate General. 12. Taking up the first point it may be mentioned that the petitioners pleadings in the writ petition are totally silent about the date of his original appointment. It may be mentioned that the petitioners allegations that he had been inducted as an ad-hoc employee is without any basis inasmuch as there is no appointment letter. It may be again emphasised that the respondents have produced the record of the Directorate to indicate that there is no mention of petitioners appointment letter, there is no despatch of such an appointment letter, the petitioner was never intimated of any ap pointment in his favour. Consequently a Finding is irresistible that the petitioner was never lawfully inducted as an ad- hoc employee, be it at Aligarh or be it at Jaun pur. Appointment against vacant posts must go with certain requirements as provided under relevant Rules and Regula tions. A copy of the said Rules filed as Annexure-S. CA.-l to the supplementary counter-affidavit indicates that vacant posts shall be filled in only on recommendations of the U. P. Subordinate Selection Commis sion. Consequently the first argument of Sri Kalia is rejected. However, there was a feeble attempt to argue that some ad-hoc appointees are working hence petitioners should also be absorbed and be not dis criminated. Consequently the first argument of Sri Kalia is rejected. However, there was a feeble attempt to argue that some ad-hoc appointees are working hence petitioners should also be absorbed and be not dis criminated. The Court however, does not find any validity for such SAMAYOJAN or absorption. There is no law or rule under which such SAMAYOJAN is possible. No doubt there are Regularisation Rules which are admittedly not attracted to the facts of these cases. This subsidiary argument thus also fails. It is for the State to see and ex amine as to how and under what authority such a G. O. could be issued under which SAMAYOJAN was ordered when law does not permit it. 13. Coming to the second point that the letter of appointment had emanated from a person in authority, this argument is baseless for the simple reason that the said authority did not follow the method and procedure laid down by the Rules. The Sub ordinate Selection Commission only was authorised to hold test and interview and if the petitioners case would have been recommended by the Commission then alone the question of appointment would have arisen. As mentioned above this proce dure had never come into existence in the instant case. The then Director in criminal conspiracy with the petitioner and some other officials, issued fake and forged letter of appointment de hors the Rules. The second argument of Sri Kalia, therefore, also fails. 14. Coming now to the third argument it was strenuously canvassed by Sri Kalia that principles of natural justice are well known and the moment an order is stigmatic or that it has been passed in effect to undo the existing right of the affected person, the affected person should be given an oppor tunity to plead his case before such an order is passed. In this connection it was con tended that the procedure followed by the department in issuing the impugned ter mination orders is totally illegal and con trary to the accepted principles of natural justice. Reliance has been placed by Sri Kalia on two decisions of the Honble Supreme Court (i) Union of India and others v. M. Bhaskaran, 1995 Supp,. (4) SCC page 100 and (ii) Ashwani Kumar and others v. State of Bihar and others (1997) 2 SCC p. 1. 15. Reliance has been placed by Sri Kalia on two decisions of the Honble Supreme Court (i) Union of India and others v. M. Bhaskaran, 1995 Supp,. (4) SCC page 100 and (ii) Ashwani Kumar and others v. State of Bihar and others (1997) 2 SCC p. 1. 15. In the case of M. Bhaskaran (supra) the facts were that the respondents in that appeal had applied for being absorbed as a casual labourer in the Railway Service and in that process had used a bogus or forged casual labourer service card. Though he was initially appointed, the Railway department held enquiry and found that forged cards were used by the respondent therein and, therefore found the said conduct as miscon duct within the meaning of Rule 3 (i) and terminated the employment of the respon dent. The Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench however took the view that the aforesaid conduct of the respon dent therein may not have been covered within the meaning of Rule 3, Railway Ser vice Conduct Rules and, therefore, inter fered with the termination order. On appeal being taken by the Honble Supreme Court it was held that the view of the CAT was not correct and the impugned order of the Tribunal were set aside inasmuch as the respondents application challenging the termination was also dismissed. Even though the facts may not be applicable to the instant case Sri Kalia wanted to argue that their Lordships of Supreme Court clearly laid down the law to the effect that:- Therefore it cannot be said that the appel lants are estopped from recalling such fraudulent ly obtained employment orders of the respon dents subject of course to following due proce dure of law and in due compliance with the prin ciples of natural justice on which aspect there is no dispute between the parties. If any lenient view is taken on the facts of the present case in favour of the respondents, then it would amount to putting premium on dishonesty and sharp practice which on the facts of the present case cannot be taken. " 16. If any lenient view is taken on the facts of the present case in favour of the respondents, then it would amount to putting premium on dishonesty and sharp practice which on the facts of the present case cannot be taken. " 16. The stress of Sri Kaliya was that the principles of natural justice have to be fol lowed and since in the cited case an enquiry was conducted and thereafter it was held that the ad hoc service cards used by the respondents in the appeal were forged and their services were terminated, the argu ment therefore proceeded that in the ab sence of such a procedure having been fol lowed in this case, the appointment of the petitioner cannot be cancelled by the im pugned order. The genesis of the decision cited is being correctly interpreted by Sri Kalia but on the facts of the instant petition the decision has no application at all. In that case there was genuine application, genuine selection and genuine appointment but the respondents therein used bogus and forged certificates. Whether the papers were bogus and forged or not could be found out only in an enquiry. As soon as it was noticed by the Railway authorities that the respondents had used bogus and forged ad-hoc service cards, the impugned orders terminating their services were passed. In the instant case, there was no advertised vacancy, there was no application of the petitioner against any advertised vacant post and there was no selection process. The authority issuing the letter of appointment had absolutely no right or authority under the law to issue the alleged appointment letter which have been rightly characterised as fake and forged. Under the circumstances there could not have been a greater or fraudulent act on the part of the petitioner than to obtain such fraudulent appointment letter and, there fore on the very face of it the petitioners case did not require any compliance of the principles of natural justice as interpreted by Sri Kalia by relying upon the aforesaid case law. 17. The petitioners own case however is that he had made a representation seeking regularisation of his appointment. The im pugned order may now be referred to which wilt indicate that the respondents have in fact dealt with the representation of the petitioner and have passed the impugned termination order. 17. The petitioners own case however is that he had made a representation seeking regularisation of his appointment. The im pugned order may now be referred to which wilt indicate that the respondents have in fact dealt with the representation of the petitioner and have passed the impugned termination order. This necessitates going into the order dated 14-1-97. Translated into English, the relevant portion of the said order dated 14-1 -97 will read as under:- "with due deference to the order in writ petition No. 5258 (SS) of 1994 A. K. Srivastava and others v. State of U. P. and others, dated 2-11-94 the representation of the petitioners is being disposed of as below:- The Honble High Court had directed that the representation of the petitioners should be disposed of within two months of the order dated 2-11-94. In compliance with the aforesaid order the then Director Dr. Shiv Raj Singh instead of deciding your representation, issued an appoint ment letter in your favour at the post of Phar macist. There is absolutely no record or file to support the allegation concerning your alleged appointment on ad-hoc basis and there is no per sonal file regarding you nor is there any despatch number or entry regarding the despatch of your appointment letter in the Directorate. It is ob vious therefore that you obtained the appoint ment letter having entered into criminal con spiracy with Dr. Shiv Raj Singh, the then Director. As per the notification of the State Govern ment dated 22-7-91 the right to make selection for appointment to the post of Pharmacist vests in the U. P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission and it is only the selected candidate by the said Commission who may be appointed by the Direc tor. Consequently the action of the then Director in issuing the appointment letter to you (the petitioner in the sail) writ petition) is disobeying the Rules and illegal. Therefore the appointment letter issued in favour of Virendra Nath Dubey dated 15-12-94 is terminated forthwith and his representation is hereby rejected. Sd/- R. K. Jha, Director. " 18. The aforesaid contents of the im pugned order leave no manner of doubt that the petitioner had played fraud by entering into conspiracy with the then Director Dr. Shiv Raj Singh and, therefore he cannot be permitted to take any advantage whatsoever of his fraudulent activity. Sd/- R. K. Jha, Director. " 18. The aforesaid contents of the im pugned order leave no manner of doubt that the petitioner had played fraud by entering into conspiracy with the then Director Dr. Shiv Raj Singh and, therefore he cannot be permitted to take any advantage whatsoever of his fraudulent activity. It is well known that fraud vitiated all actions and contract. In fact the very case on which Sri Kalia relied upon the Honble Supreme Court has al ready observed that where fraudulent docu ments were used by the candidate seeking employment and that employment was ter minated then, if any lenient view is taken on the facts of the said case in favour of the respondents, then it would amount to put ting premium on dishonesty and sharp prac tice. On the facts of the present case also, indulgence cannot be permitted. 19. Coming now to the cited case of Ashwani Kumar and others, it may be pointed out that in the said case an enquiry was conducted by an Enquiry Committee in pursuance to the orders of Honble Patna High Court concerning the question whether some appointments made under the Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme taken up as part of the 20 point programme under planned expenditure, were followed or not. It was held by the Apex Court that:- "it must therefore, be held that the appoint ments of 6000 employees as made by Dr. Mallik in the Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme were ex facie illegal. As they were contrary to all recog nised recruitment procedure and were highly ar bitrary, they were not binding on the State of Bihar. It may be mentioned here that one of the points canvassed in the said case was, placing reliance on the decision of the apex Court in Jacob M. Puthuparambil v. Kerala Water Authority, that since the petitioners were continued from more than two years, they were entitled to be regularised. The observations of the Supreme Court are:- The aforesaid decision cannot be of any avail to the appellants for the simple reason that once we find that there were no vacancies at all on which the appellants would be regularised there was no occasion to undertake such an exercise especially when the initial entries of these appel lants in the service were found to be illegal and vitiated. " 20. " 20. Perhaps the facts to this extent are wholly parallel to the facts in the present case. In the instant case also there is no valid and lawful entry concerning the appoint ment of the petitioner. There is no vacancy for which the posts were advertised. There was no selection by the Selection Board and therefore, the Directorate issued an order which was completely fraudulent on the face of it. 21. In view of the aforesaid observa tions the argument of Sri Kalia that prin ciples of natural justice should have been followed is also rejected. The added reason for this conclusion is that the State Govern ment had decided the representation of the petitioner himself and that is what the State Government was validly called upon to do by the order of the learned Single Judge dated2-ll-1994. 22. Coming now to the writ petition filed by Ajai Kumar Srivastava it may be mentioned that but for some different dates concerning his alleged appointment and also the place of posting, other facts are identical with the case of V. N. Dubey decided earlier. The allegations of Ajai Kumar Srivastava are that he also joined as daily wage worker on 25-3-1991 at State Ayurvedic Hospital Shahganj, District Jaunpur; seeing that the ad-hoc employees were being regularised the petitioner also made a representation to the opposite par ties. Since no heed was paid to the said representation he was forced to file the ear lier writ petition No. 5258 (S/s) 1994 which came to be finally disposed of by learned Single Judge on 2-11- 1994. The petitioner Ajai Kumar Srivastava further alleges that on 15-12-1994 an order was passed by the opposite parties appointing him to the vacant post of Pharmacist at State Ayur vedic Hospital Navgaon, District Aligarh which order was subsequently changed by another order dated 28-12-1994 asking the petitioner to join at State Ayurvedic Hospi tal Caumbaul, District-Mainpuri. The petitioner alleges he joined at Mainpuri on 6-1-1995. It was further said that having joined on 6-1-1995 at Mainpuri there was transfer order dated 14-8-1995 asking the petitioner to join at State Ayurvedic Hospi tal Shahganj, Jaunpur and according to the petitioner he joined at Jaunpur on 29-8-1995 having been relieved from Mainpuri on 28-8-1995. 23. The petitioner alleges he joined at Mainpuri on 6-1-1995. It was further said that having joined on 6-1-1995 at Mainpuri there was transfer order dated 14-8-1995 asking the petitioner to join at State Ayurvedic Hospi tal Shahganj, Jaunpur and according to the petitioner he joined at Jaunpur on 29-8-1995 having been relieved from Mainpuri on 28-8-1995. 23. But far of the aforesaid difference of facts concerning the dates and the place of initial posting, the rest of the pleadings, facts and points are same. 24. For the reasons stated in the writ petition of V. N. Dubey aforesaid the petitioner Ajai Kumar Srivastava is also not entitled to any relief as claimed by him in the writ petition. 25. Coming now to the third connected writ petition No. 2878 (S/s) of 1997, Raj Kumar Sharma v. State of U. P. , again the points are similar to the aforesaid two cases except the dates posting and place bf post ing. Petitioner Raj Kumar Sharma alleges that he was initially appointed as a daily wage worker on 25-3-1991 in the State Ayurvedic Hospital, Pipiganj, Gorakhpur. He has filed copy of appointment letter as Annexure-2. He also alleges that having come to know that others who were similar ly appointed were being regularised by the State Government made representation and those having not been decided he also joined the other two petitioners in writ peti tion 5258 (S/s) 1994 which was disposed of by a learned Single Judge on 2-11-1994 as already mentioned above. Petitioner Raj Kumar Sharma further alleges that by an order passed by opposite party No. 2 on 15-12-1994 the petitioner was adjusted as an Ayurvedic Pharmacist in the State Ayur vedic Hospital, Sujawalpur, district-Aligarh and joined duties thereon 25-12-1994. The petitioner alleges that he continued in the State Ayurvedic Hospital Sujawalpur, Aligarh and discharge his duties there. 26. Rest of the pleadings, factual and legal assertions are similar to the other two petitions mentioned above. Coming to the question of appointment letter Annexure-2, the counter-affidavit specifically says that the said appointment letter is forged, fake and fabricated documents (See para 4 of the counter- affidavit ). 27. For the reasons mentioned herein before, the petitioner Raj Kumar Sharma is not entitled to any relief as claimed in the writ petition. 28. Coming to the question of appointment letter Annexure-2, the counter-affidavit specifically says that the said appointment letter is forged, fake and fabricated documents (See para 4 of the counter- affidavit ). 27. For the reasons mentioned herein before, the petitioner Raj Kumar Sharma is not entitled to any relief as claimed in the writ petition. 28. During the course of argument it was pointed out on behalf of all the three petitioners that all of them were entitled to the salary for the work which they have rendered in this connection. It was em phasized that so far as the petitioner Raj Kumar Sharma is concerned he has been paid salary upto date but the other two petitioners namely V. N. Dubey and Ajai Kumar Srivastava were paid salary intermit tently and their salary upto date has not been paid. There is no dispute on this point. Interest of justice would therefore, require that the salary of the two remaining petitioners i. e. V. N. Dubey and Ajai Kumar Srivastava should be paid upto date expeditiously as has been paid to the third petitioner in this category namely, Raj Kumar Sharma. The salary payment shall however not confer any right of continuity or making the illegal appointment letter legal or valid. 29. Having recorded the aforesaid findings to the effect that the petitioners cannot get any of the reliefs claimed primarily on the reason that all of them snatched advantage due to collusive and conspiral activity, the Court was faced with a touchingly sentimental argument advanced by Sri S. K. Kalia. He said that assuming that for once the petitioner did enter into the conspiracy and obtained illegal appoint ment letter but who was or were really at fault ? And for how long that one fault shall be taken to be the cause of penalty of each petitioners ? He also argued that the then Director and other officials of the Ministry concerned were ill-reputed to be selling employment to all and sundry on illegal payments and gratification. If some needy person managed to be get such an employment, he need not be condemned for all his life. In this connection he vehemently ar gued that the vacancies exist even now as it was since about the years 1986-87. If some needy person managed to be get such an employment, he need not be condemned for all his life. In this connection he vehemently ar gued that the vacancies exist even now as it was since about the years 1986-87. The U. P. Ayurvedic and Unani Pharmacists Service Rules came into force in the year 1991, yet no regular appointment was ever sought to be made through the Commission. All the appointments were made through "back door". It was reiterated that if some persons working in the Ministry or the Directorate and also the head of department took upon themselves to play with the law and abused or misused their position for personal il legal gain and innocent job seekers fell prey to such a machination is it not the duty of this Court of justice to permit job seekers too becoming good-citizens ? Should they remain condemned citizens for all times to come ? In fact Sri Kalia fervently pleaded for judicial amnesty even for those destitutes who are not before the Court as petitioners but may nonetheless be in the waiting to receive such termination orders. 30. Notwithstanding the sentimental argument of Sri Kalia, the philosophy beneath which cannot be said to be without any basis, it was forcefully contended as of fact by the learned Addl. Advocate General, Sri R. K. Singh, for the respondents that once the petitioner obtained a fake and forged appointment relying upon fraudulent practice, the petitioner cannot take any advantage of that fraud and cannot get any other benefit because of their fraudulent activity. In the end he rightly said that this Courts powers are wide enough to bring about justice and equilibrium in the future aspiration as compared to past mis deeds of those destitutes; if and when some direction about their future emancipation is passed, the State shall abide by. 31. Looking to the facts involved the conclusion is imperative and unavoidable that the then Director had obviously misused his position with the help of some other officials in the Ministry or the Direc torate and the petitioners had join hand with them. How and why the Government machinery did not check such blatant misuse of power, is not known. This matter also should have been gone into by the higher Government officials. 32. How and why the Government machinery did not check such blatant misuse of power, is not known. This matter also should have been gone into by the higher Government officials. 32. This Court is applied at the in genious methods adopted by some in the governmental machinery to cheat innocent citizens, usurp illegal gains and thereby also generate frustration in genuine and law abiding candidates awaiting valid proce dural appointments. It is a fit case where this part of the crime should also be investigated preferably by C. B. I, who are already inves tigating the ancillary matters of what is now referred in the media as Ayurvedic Scam. The State would do well to pass necessary orders in this regard expeditiously. 33. The petitioners are thus faced by circumstances to dance at the central point between two possible divergent resultants, one is sealing their fate to ever become a Government servant, the other is asking them to support their families, relatives and meet their social obligations. 34. Faced with the inherent human aspects involved in the three petitions this Court examined in depth the arguments of Sri Kalia and Sri R. K. Singh. The Court also rechecked the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Khagesh Kumar, (1995) 4 SCC (Supp) 182. It appears necessary to direct the State Government to consider the three petitioners for giving to them benefit of "age relaxation" in future vacancies for one chance only so that the services of the meritorious among the petitioners may be utilised by the State, if recommended for selection by the Commission. As regards the question whether any weightage can be given to the petitioner for the period of years they have served, this Court need not issue any such directions for the simple reason that such direction may be contrary to the finding that no advantage can be claimed by petitioners for the illegally ob tained appointment letters. This may be falling purely within the policy making powers of the State Government and it will be free to deal with this question. 35. This may be falling purely within the policy making powers of the State Government and it will be free to deal with this question. 35. In view of the aforesaid discussions the writ petitions are dismissed but with the following two directions:- (i) in future vacancies for the post of Phar macist, the petitioners cases for relaxation of age shall be considered, so that they may, if they apply, get one chance to appear at such test or examina tion as may be conducted for their appointment in accordance with recruitment rules in Rules 14, 15 of the U. P. Ayurvedic and Unani Pharmacists Services Rules, 1991. It is directed that all the steps in the selection process and appointment to the post shall not be delayed even by a day beyond necessary; (ii) the question whether any weightage may be given to the petitioners for the working years, is a matter for consideration of the State Government. 36. In view of the facts and circumstan ces, the parties are directed to bear their own costs. Petitions dismissed. .