Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 79 (MEG)

Pradip Kumar Prasad v. Union of India

2018-11-14

S.R.SEN

body2018
JUDGMENT : S.R. Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. R. Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Mozika, learned CGC appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The brief fact of the petitioner's case in a nutshell is that: "This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking direction against the respondent authority for setting aside the impugned order of dismissal dated 16th November 2012, passed by the Respondent Authorities on the ground that the petitioner before passing the impugned order of the dismissal, no enquiry was constituted before imposing the punitive punishment of major penalty of dismissal as enshrined under Rule 11 of the Central Civil Services Rules, 1965 and also the impugned order of dismissal has been issued by the officer who is not empowered to issue the same. Hence, this instant writ petition." 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was dismissed from service on 16.11.2012 without any enquiry and also contended that the person who passed the dismissal order is not a competent authority. 4. On the other hand, the learned CGC appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner obtained enrollment by producing a fake domicile certificate and when it was detected, a show cause notice was issued and the same was replied by the petitioner. 5. After hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after examining the record before me, which is at Annexure-5/Show Cause Notice and Annexure-6/An Application Regarding Residential Verification (Typed copy) of the affidavit, the same are reproduced herein below for ready reference: "No. 1 Trg Bn ARTC & S P.O Dimapur (Nagaland) Pin-797115 1.11011/Trg-08/Lkh/2012/ 18th Oct, 2012 No. G/5023200X Rect/GD Pradip Kumar Prasad Itanagar Coy No. 1PI No. 1Trg Bn Show Cause Notice 1. You had submitted Domicile Certificate No. P.15/1/36/2006/20 dated 04 Oct 2006 during enrolment for SSC Rally and were enrolled as Rect/GD on 30 June 2012. The said certificate was forwarded to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills, Shillong (Meghalaya) for verification vide ARTC & S letter No. I.12011/67/Rect/ SSCAMB/ 2012/3414 dated 29 August 2012. You had submitted Domicile Certificate No. P.15/1/36/2006/20 dated 04 Oct 2006 during enrolment for SSC Rally and were enrolled as Rect/GD on 30 June 2012. The said certificate was forwarded to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills, Shillong (Meghalaya) for verification vide ARTC & S letter No. I.12011/67/Rect/ SSCAMB/ 2012/3414 dated 29 August 2012. The Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills, Shillong (Meghalaya) has carried out the necessary investigation and has intimated that the certificate is not genuine and the same was not issued from their office (i.e., FAKE). 2. You are hereby directed to submit your reply as to why you should not be dismissed from service on the grounds of producing a false certificate during your enrolment. Your reply should be submitted by 17 Nov 2012. Sd/- (A K Sihag) Maj Offg CO". "Name: Pradip Kumar Prasad Coy: Itanagar No. 1 Platoon Unit: No. 1 Lakhimpur Trg Bn ARTC & S To, The Commandant No. 1 Lakhimpur Trg Batallion Sub: An Application Regarding Residential Verification Sir, I, No. 5023200 Rect Pradip Kumar Prasad am under training in your command. I Pradip Kumar Prasad, had submitted my domicile certificate at the time of recruitment which was made by a lawyer so I am not sure if the certificate is register or not. As per the police verification it was not found registered because of which I will have to go back home being discharged from service. Sir, it is submitted that I got enrolled in very difficult circumstances and condition at my home is very bad. This news has made my mother sick. I have already taken training for 19 weeks and now my discharge will make my life miserable. Therefore, Sir, you are requested to give me some more time so that I can get my domicile certificate registered within 30-45 days and submit the same. Your obedient recruit Sd/- No. 5023200 Name: Pradip Kumar Prasad." 6. On perusal of the Annexure-5 and 6 referred above, it appears that the domicile certificate was arranged by a lawyer, as such the petitioner was not sure whether the certificate was registered or not. 7. Annexure-3 of the affidavit dated 19.09.2012 at Serial No. 4 reflects that the remark of Shri. Pradip Kumar Prasad is "FAKE". 8. On perusal of the Annexure-5 and 6 referred above, it appears that the domicile certificate was arranged by a lawyer, as such the petitioner was not sure whether the certificate was registered or not. 7. Annexure-3 of the affidavit dated 19.09.2012 at Serial No. 4 reflects that the remark of Shri. Pradip Kumar Prasad is "FAKE". 8. So, after perusal of the record and applying my judicial mind, I am of the view that a person can approach for justice with a clean hand. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned dismissal order dated 16.11.2012. I further note that when a person is guilty of his own conduct, he/she cannot just ask for relief on technical ground. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed and stands disposed of.