1. Petitioner seeks issuance of madamus directing the respondents to release pay dues/emoluments from December, 1996 and not to disturb the petitioner from her present place of posting, petitioner averred in the petition that she was appointed as Craft Teacher and adjusted in Boys High School, Pinglena. The petitioner joined there and discharged her duties but her salary has not been released. 2. Respondents filed the objections taking specific stand therein, in reply to para 2, 3, and 4 of the writ petition which is extracted below: "b. Para No. 2 of the writ petition being absolutely false, is denied. The order of appointment patently appears to be forged. In fact, no such order of appointment does exist even in the records of the office of Chief Education Officer, the best information of the answering-respondent. All this appears to be handiwork of an Ex-Junior Assistant, namely Mohd. Amin Najar working present in the office of Zonal Education Officer Tahab, Pulwama. After having smelled something fishy in the matter the answering respondent has in fact seized the Service Book of the said Jr. Assistant, which itself smacks of malafides. Under the circumstances, if the Honble court so-pleases, the matter needs to be investigated. 2. The answering respondent emphatically denies the averments of para 2 of the petition. The petitioner has never worked in High School Pinglina, Nor could the an swering respondent allow her to join, as there exists no vacancy of craft teacher. No directions have ever been received by the answering respondent by high authorities in this behalf. As a matter of truth, the petitioner has never shown her appearance or appeared in the school premises. She might even be not aware of the location of the location of the school as well. 3. In reply to para 3 of the petition the answering respondent submits that he has never issued any certificate to the effect that the petitioner was punctual to her duties since March 1996. The certificate so referred, if exists, is obviously manipulated and forged as annexure A and A-1 are false and the petitioner is enjoined to produce the original record in this connection. Even a cursory look on the certificate indicates that the signatures of the answering respondents have been forged, and a photostat copy manipulated. The petitioner, as already submitted has never joined and could not join as there, was no vacancy. Even a cursory look on the certificate indicates that the signatures of the answering respondents have been forged, and a photostat copy manipulated. The petitioner, as already submitted has never joined and could not join as there, was no vacancy. She has never been paid a single penny nor has a request been ever made by her personally or otherwise for any such payment and she could not do it. She is not entitled to receive any pay as she has never worked in the school." 3. Heard learned counsel for the respondents Mr. M.I. Qadri, Sr. AAG. 4. In view of the categorical stand taken by respondents that the appointment of the petitioner is fake and not born by the record, it makes out case of cheating on the part of the petitioner in connivance with the officials of he department. Mr. Qadiri, Learned Senior Additional Advocate General, has pressed into service the judgment delivered in LPA 338 of 1997 decided on 11.07.2001, wherein the Letters Patent Bench of this court has held as under: - "... Appellant were allegedly holding the respective posts by practising fraud. A fraud is an act of deliberate deception with the design of securing something by taking unfair advantage of another. It is a deception in order to gain by anothers loss. It is a cheating. It is well settled principle of law that if any advantage or order of the court is obtained by playing fraud, it is a nullity in the eyes of law. From the facts narrated above, we are clearly of the view that the appellate not only entered into the service from the back-door by playing fraud, but also produced a fake appointment order even be fore the appellate court with a view to continue in the post by practicing fraud upon the court." 5. It is a sheer case of fraudulent appointment. Such cases shall not be rewarded by granting relief to the petitioner who has set up the claim on the basis of fake appointment order. The petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of his appointment and should not be permitted to enjoy the fruits of dishonesty. It is a sheer case of fraudulent appointment. Such cases shall not be rewarded by granting relief to the petitioner who has set up the claim on the basis of fake appointment order. The petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of his appointment and should not be permitted to enjoy the fruits of dishonesty. Supreme Court while dealing with such forged appointment coupled with dishonesty has in case Krishan Yadav vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 1994 SC 2166 (para 22) held that: - "The effect of setting aside the selection would mean the appointments held by these 96 candidates(including the respondents) will have no right to go to the office. Normally speaking, we should require them to disgorge the benefit- of these ill-gotten gains. That means they will have to repay the entire salary and perks which they have received from the said office. But here we show as treak of sympathy. For more than 4 years, they were enjoying the benefit of Office. The proper lesson would be learn by them if their appointments are set aside teaching them that dishonesty could never pay. 6. Mr. Qadiri, Sr. AAG, has also brought to the notice of the court judgment reported in AIR 1988 Patna 26 wherein the petitioners were also claiming the salary and appointment on the basis of fake appointments. The court dealing with the sub mission of the appointees held as under:- "It is manifest from the above that the rights to salary, pension and other service benefits are entirely statutory in nature in public service. Therefore, these rights, including the right to salary, spring from a valid and legal appointment to the post. Once it is found that the very appointment is illegal and is nonest in the eye of law, no statutory entitlement for salary of consequential rights of pension and other monetary benefits can arise. In particular, if the very appointment is rested on forgery, no statutory right can flow from it." 7. No case for admission of the writ petition is made out. The petition is, accordingly dismissed on merits.