1. Official respondents invited ap plications from the eligible candidates for selection against the post of Anganwadi workers on honarium ba sis for various Anganwadi Centres in cluding Anganwadi Centre Wagay Mohalla, District Ganderbal in terms of advertisement notice dated 14.12.2009. Petitioner being resident of Banday Bagh also applied for selec tion and engagement as Anganwadi Worker. A panel was prepared by the official respondents, in which peti tioner and respondent No. 5 were en listed and objections were invited from all the interested persons/candidates. Petitioner after noticing the name of respondent no. 5 in the panel immedi ately made a complaint that respon dent no. 5 is ineligible as she has not passed the matriculation examination, but has managed fake matriculation certificate, which she had annexed with the application form. Petitioner also made various representations to the same effect to the official respon dents, but neither any inquiry was con ducted nor candidature of respondent no. 5 was rejected. Official respondents, particularly respondent No. 3, was hav ing interest and being her favourite candidate, selected respondent No. 5 and issued the appointment order in her favour. Thereafter vide communi cation dated 28.01.2010 (Annexure "F" to the writ petition) respondent no. 2 directed respondent No. 4 to look into the matter, but despite that neither any inquiry was conducted nor any action was drawn, constrained the petitioner to file the writ petition in hand with a prayer to quash the selection of respondent No. 5 and select/appoint her against the said post. 2. Respondents 1 to 4have filed re ply. It is averred that petitioner had objected the selection of respondent No. 5 on the ground that she had produced fake matriculation certificate and Child Development Project Officer, Ganderbal-respondent no. 3 immedi ately requested the authorities of J&K State Board of School Education for veri fication and report, who submitted the report dated 24.01.2010 to the effect that the matriculation certificate so produced is genuine. Respondent No. 5 resisted the petition by filing reply on the ground that she is matriculate and the certificate produced is not fake, was meritorious and came to be rightly selected and the petitioner has no cause of action at all. 3. Vide order dated 21.02.2011 re spondent No. 5 was asked to produce the original matriculation certificate and she accordingly produce the same in the open court on 03.05.2011 and was taken on record.
3. Vide order dated 21.02.2011 re spondent No. 5 was asked to produce the original matriculation certificate and she accordingly produce the same in the open court on 03.05.2011 and was taken on record. 4. The case came up for consider ation on 05.05.2011 and during the con sideration it was found that writ peti tioner had taken the matriculation examination conducted by the J&K State Board of School Education under two roll numbers viz 871273 and 871279. On noticing the said fact, Sh. Mohd. Yousuf, learned counsel for the Board was asked to accept notice on behalf of Board and to produce all the relevant record pertaining to respon dent Shamima Aziz. Accordingly, the Board submitted the affidavit on 16.05.2011. It is apt to reproduce para-1 of the said affidavit herein: "That in pursuance to order from the Hon'ble High Court of J&K at Srinagar, dated 05.05.2011, the record of two Roll Nos: viz, 871273, 871279 of 10th class examination, Annual Regular session: 2001, was consulted and as per the information tendered by the concerned Assistant Secretary Verification (KD), supported by the Admission-cum-permission form, the candidate namely Shameema Aziz D/o Ab. Aziz Baba bearing Roll No. 871273 has not qualified 10th class examination ses sion: Annual Regular-2011." 5. In terms of the said affidavit, re spondent Shamima Aziz has not quali fied 10th class examination under Roll No. 871273, annual regular session 2001, but in the affidavit the Board had not given the information regarding taking the examination by respondent no. 5 under Roll No. 871279. Accordingly again a direction was passed vide or der dated 06.06.2011, whereby Board was asked to file fresh affidavit indi cating whether respondent no. 5 had appeared in the 10th class examination under Roll No. 871279 and also to sub mit verification report about Annexure-R1 filed by respondents 1 to 4 with their reply. Child Development Project Of ficer, Ganderbal was also asked to ap pear in person along with the record and original copy of Annexure-R1. In terms of the said order, Dr. M. S. Baloria, Secretary to Board has filed affidavit. It is apt to reproduce relevant portion of said affidavit herein: "1. That in pursuance to order from the Hon'ble High Court of J&K at Srinagar, dated 05.05.2011, the record of two Roll Nos.
In terms of the said order, Dr. M. S. Baloria, Secretary to Board has filed affidavit. It is apt to reproduce relevant portion of said affidavit herein: "1. That in pursuance to order from the Hon'ble High Court of J&K at Srinagar, dated 05.05.2011, the record of two Roll Nos. viz 871273 and 871279 of 10th Class Exami nation, Annual Regular 2001 was consulted and as per the information tendered by the concerned As sistant Secretary Verification (KD) supported by the admission-cum-permission form, the candidate namely Shameema Aziz D/o Ab. Aziz Baba bearing Roll No. 871273 has not qualified 10th Class Exami nation Annual Regular 2001. She could not clear three papers and was placed in reappear category. 2. That under Roll No. 871279 one Neighat Ali D/O Ali Mohd. ap peared but could not clear two pa pers and was placed in reappear category, a copy of relevant extract of result register and a copy of let ter dated 11.05.2011 of concerned Assistant Secretary are annexed herewith as Annexure-R1 and R-II. 3. That under the above dated or ders of this Hon'ble Court authen ticity of letter No. F-58 dated 24.01.2010 was ascertained. No such letter has ever been issued by the Board, the same is therefore fake and forged." 6. CDPO was present in the Court on 19.08.2011 along with the record and the original copy of so called verifica tion report-R1. 7. Keeping in view the above said facts, it appears that respondent no. 5 has not qualified the matriculation ex amination under Roll No. 871273 but the certificate so produced by her, which is made part of the file, do dis close that she has qualified the exami nation. The certificate which appears to have been issued under Roll No. 871279 is also not genuine for the rea son that as per the report of Board one Neighat Ali had appeared under the said roll number. The Board authori ties have also reported that they have not sent any verification report an nexed with the reply of respondents 1 to 4 (Annexure-R1), the same is not genuine and forged one. 8. In the given circumstances, I deem it proper to admit the writ peti tion. Accordingly the writ petition is admitted and with the consensus of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 9.
8. In the given circumstances, I deem it proper to admit the writ peti tion. Accordingly the writ petition is admitted and with the consensus of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 9. Prima facie it is found that re spondent No. 5 was not matriculate at the relevant point of time and had pro duced fake certificate including veri fication report (Annexure-R1 to the re ply of respondents 1 to 4). 10. Viewed thus, the writ petition is allowed and the selection and appoint ment of respondent No. 5 is quashed. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner provided she was eligible at the relevant point of time. Let consideration order be passed within a period of three months from today in terms of the rules occupying the field at the relevant point of time read with eligibility of the writ peti tioner. It is made clear that if it is found that petitioner was not eligible, in that eventuality the respondents are at lib erty to issue fresh advertisement no tice under rules. 11. Further, it is provided that CDPO, Ganderbal to lodge FIR before the Crime Branch within one week from today and Sr. Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch is directed to register the case on the report of CDPO and con duct investigation. The investigation officer should not be less than the rank of Dy. S.P., who shall ascertain who are the persons who were involved in the preparation of fake matriculation cer tificates and the so called verification report (Annexure-R1 to the reply of re spondents 1 to 4). The investigating of ficer shall also ascertain the role of of ficials/employees of the office of re spondents 3 & 4 including J&K State Board of School Education. He is also commanded to submit status of the in vestigation after every fortnight to the Registrar Judicial to this Court. 12. CDPO is directed to submit the compliance report within one week from today before the Registrar Judi cial of this Court. 13. Registry is also directed to send matriculation certificate produced by respondent No. 5 before this Court to Child Development Project Officer, Ganderbal through their counsel Mr. Mir Suhail, enabling her sent the same along with other relevant record to the Crime Branch. Registry is also directed to return the record to Mr. Mir Suhail.