Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 120 (TRI)

Naresh Kumar, S/o Shri Sish Ram v. Union of India

2017-02-15

S.C.DAS

body2017
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) : Heard learned counsel, Mr. P.K. Pal for the petitioner and learned CGC, Mr. A. Roy Barman for the respondents. 2. Pursuant to an advertisement for filling up of the post of constable/fitter of the Central Reserve Police Force (in short, CRPF) under the respondents, the petitioner participated in the selection process and was successful in the selection test. By writing letter dated 14.02.2011, petitioner was asked to report to the Group Commandant of the CRPF, Agartala and accordingly he reported to his duties on 12.03.2011. Thereafter by writing a letter dated 01.04.2011 (Annexure IV to the writ petition) the respondents asked him to proceed to his home town immediately. Being compelled the petitioner left for his home town and subsequently on query he came to learn from Maharana Pratap Industrial Training Centre, Bhiwani, Haryana wherefrom he obtained certificate of trade test in Motor Mechanic that the respondents made communication with that Institute in respect of the genuinity of provisional certificate and final certificate issued by the Institute in the name of the petitioner. The Institute informed the respondents that the petitioner undergone the course from July 2007 to August 2009 and that the certificate was genuine. Since the petitioner did not receive any communication from the respondents he approached respondent No.3 on 26.02.2013 with an application under the Right to Information Act and pursuant to that application he was informed that the competent authority cancelled his candidature for the reason that the provisional certificate and the final certificate presented by the petitioner was not genuine. An FIR was lodged against the petitioner in the East Agartala Police Station which was registered as East Agartala P.S.Case No.7/12 under Section 468/471/34 of IPC alleging that the petitioner obtained fake documents and submitted the same for his recruitment and police after investigation submitted final report stating that the certificate was genuine. Even after ascertaining the genuinity of the trade certificate of the petitioner, he was not allowed to join the post and hence, petitioner filed the writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to allow him to join the post and also prayed for quashing letter dated 01.04.2011 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) and letter dated 20.08.2011 (Annexure XIV to the writ petition). 3. 3. Respondents contended that the offer of appointment was issued to the petitioner subject to verification of his certificate/testimonials including the certificate of technical qualification on presentation of the original before the appointing authority at Agartala. When the originals were presented, it was found that the provisional certificate and original certificates in respect of technical qualification of the petitioner were conflicting with each other and to remove the discrepancies letter was written to the particular Institute and after verification since it was found that the certificates were not genuine, the petitioner was debarred from joining the post. In Para 9 of the counter affidavit the respondents stated thus: “9. That, in reply to the statement made in para 5 of the writ petition I say that no such provisional trade certificate bearing No.081474 dated 25/9/2009 was submitted by the writ petitioner and as such, the allegations/statements made in para 5 of the writ petition is strongly denied. It is further to be stated here that while checking the testimonials of the writ petitioner, the following shortcomings/variations have been noticed in connection with provisional certificates submitted along with his application form and original certificate: Provisional certificate submitted along with application form Original certificate submitted after reporting 1) Provisional certificate issued by Maharana Pratap Industrial Training Centre. 1) Provisional certificate issued by Maharana Pratap Industrial Private Training Centre. 2) Haryana Govt. Regd. No.MPIES/56/2006- 07. 2) Haryana Govt. Regd. No.56. 3) The place of Training at MPITC Bopara. 3) The place of Training at MPITC, Bopara (Bhiwani). 4) Enrolment No.of candidate not mentioned. 4) Enrolment No. of candidate mentioned as 102007/BH-MM-208. 5) Seal of institute mentioned as Principal, Maharana Pratap Industrial, Training Centre, Borapara, Bhiwani. 5) Seal of institute mentioned as Principal Maharana Pratap Industrial, Private, Training Centre, Bopara, Bhiwani. 6) Signature of Principal not tallied with ITI certificate 6) Signature of Principal not tallied with ITI mark sheet It was found that ITE certificate in original submitted by the writ petitioner has been issued by the college and not by the Director, Technical Education/State Council.” 4. 6) Signature of Principal not tallied with ITI certificate 6) Signature of Principal not tallied with ITI mark sheet It was found that ITE certificate in original submitted by the writ petitioner has been issued by the college and not by the Director, Technical Education/State Council.” 4. It is further contended by the respondents that chargesheet was not filed in the police case instituted against the petitioner but the petitioner has failed to produce genuine certificate to prove that he was having with requisite qualification and hence, the decision taken by the respondents in cancelling the candidature of the petitioner was right and cannot be questioned. 5. It is an admitted position that the petitioner participated in the selection process and came out successful. He was given offer of appointment and he joined Agartala office of the Group Commandant of the CRPF on 12.03.2011. In the offer of appointment the petitioner was asked to produce the original certificate of date of birth, mark sheet, certificates of technical qualification issued by the Board/Council/University. 6. Mr. Pal, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner submitted his Course Completion Trade Certificate issued by the Principal of Maharana Pratap Industrial Training Centre (Annexure-II to the writ petition). He has also submitted that a certificate was issued in the name of the petitioner and a copy of the same produced and annexed as Annexure-III to the writ petition. A bare reading of those Annexure-II and III it shows that Annexure 2 the Course Completion Certificate was issued by the Principal of Maharana Pratap Industrial Training Centre having recognized by the Haryana Government, ISO 9001:2008 whereas the certificate issued in the name of the petitioner i.e. Annexure-III shows that it was issued by the Principal, Mahara Pratap Industrial Private Training Centre registered by Haryana Govt., Regd. No.56. There is nothing to show that those Mahara Pratap Industrial Training Centre or Maharana Pratap Industrial Private Training Centre were recognized institutes of the Central Govt. of State Govt. Only a registration No. has been mentioned but what that registration No. meant for has neither been mentioned in the said certificates nor elaborated in the writ petition. The petitioner further produced a copy of the certificate issued in his name and learned counsel, Mr. Pal put emphasis on that certificate (Annexure VII to the writ petition). This certificate as whole reads thus: “To, Office of the Dy. The petitioner further produced a copy of the certificate issued in his name and learned counsel, Mr. Pal put emphasis on that certificate (Annexure VII to the writ petition). This certificate as whole reads thus: “To, Office of the Dy. Inspector General of Police, Group Centre, CRPF, Agartala, West Tripura, Tripura 799012. To Whom it May Concern This is to certify that Sh. Naresh Kumar S/o Sh. Shish Ram, Roll No.MM 0208, Completed the course of Motor Mechanic from MPIPTC, BAPORA, held during the period of Training from July 2007 to Aug.2009. This is also certified that this Training centre is Recognized by Haryana Govt. of also ISO certified. This Training Centre provide part time Training Courses in the Evening Session. Section 2007 to 2009 certificate issued by clerical mistake. Principal Maharana Pratap Industrial Private Training Centre AN ISO 9001:2008 ORGANIZATION BAPORA(Bhiwani)” 7. There is neither any file No. nor any dispatch No. in the above certificate. The certificate does not create any impression that it was issued by a genuine institute. Further the last two lines of the above certificate shows that the Training Centre provide part time training courses in the evening session. Section 2007 to 2009 certificate issued by clerical mistake. It means the certificates which were produced by the petitioner marked as Annexure II and Annexure III were certificates issued by mistake. If it is so, no genuine certificate is produced by the petitioner. Simply because in the police case, the petitioner has not been chargesheeted and a police officer made an observation that the certificate was genuine cannot prove the case of the petitioner. 8. Since it is a writ petition the petitioner is to prove by producing the genuine documents that he has practically undergone a training course in a recognized institution and successfully completed the training course to make himself eligible for appointment. The respondents declined to engage the petitioner with the following comments as indicated in Annexure XIV, i.e. letter dated 20.08.2011. The letter reads thus: “OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIPURA SECTOR CRPF, USHA BAZAR, AIRPORT ROAD, AGARTALA, WEST TRIPURA 799 009 No.R.II.04/2011TPAAdm-I To The DIGP, GC, CRPF, Agartala. Subject: REG.RECTT OF CT(RECH & TRADESMEN) 2010 Please refer to your office letter No.R.II.02/2011ECVI dated 20/07/2011. 2. The letter reads thus: “OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIPURA SECTOR CRPF, USHA BAZAR, AIRPORT ROAD, AGARTALA, WEST TRIPURA 799 009 No.R.II.04/2011TPAAdm-I To The DIGP, GC, CRPF, Agartala. Subject: REG.RECTT OF CT(RECH & TRADESMEN) 2010 Please refer to your office letter No.R.II.02/2011ECVI dated 20/07/2011. 2. Recruitment dossiers in respect of Shri. Naresh Kumar, S/O Shri Shish Ram (for the post of CT/Fitter, Roll No.09, OBC Candidate) and Shri Sumit Kumar Sinha, S/O Shri Gopi Mohan Sinha (for the post of Ct/WM, Roll No.148, OBC candidate) are returned herewith. The competent authority has cancelled candidature of above both candidates due to reasons mentioned against each: Sl. No. Name Reasons Remarks 01 Shri Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Shish Rak for the post of CT/Fitter, Roll No.09, OBC Candidate. ITI Certificate not issued by competent authority. Individual produced provisional certificate at the time of recruitment, further he was direct to submit ITI original certificate (Original) submitted by the candidate is issued by college and not by the Director, Technical Education/State Council. Further as per certificate the institute is also not recognized. Lodge a FIR against the individual. 02 -------- --------- Encl : 57 leaves. (RAJEEV KUMAR SHARMA) DIGP (ADM)” 9. After going through the pleadings and the materials placed on record and after hearing the learned counsel of the parties, I am of considered opinion that the petitioner could not make out a case that he produced genuine certificates and simply because an offer of appointment was issued which was subject to verification of his testimonials, it cannot be held that the respondents were wrong in cancelling the candidature of the petitioner. 10. The writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed. 11. Parties to bear their own costs.