Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1811 (GUJ)

JASHA BHIKHABHAI BELA v. STATE OF GUJARAT

2022-12-19

A.S.SUPEHIA

body2022
ORDER : 1. The present writ petitions have been filed for the following reliefs: “9(A) Quash and set aside the show cause notices dated 23.11.2022, Annexure-A to this petition. (B) Declare and hold that the petitioners are possessing requisite educational qualification for appointment to the post of Multi-Purpose Health Worker (Male), Class-III. (C) Direct the respondent authority to grant pay scale to the petitioners with effect from the dated of their completing 5 years of service and make payment of arrears of pay and allowances to the petitioners from the said date, with interest at the rate which the Honourable Court may consider as just and proper.” 2. Thus, the prayers clause indicate that the petitioners are challenging the show-cause notice dated 23.11.2022 issued, pursuant to which they are called upon to produce necessary documents of proof with regard to having obtained the degree or diploma from OPJS and VMS Universities-respondent No. 4 in the respective petitions. 3. The genesis of the issue raised in the present writ petitions lies on two judgments of the Division Benches of this Court i.e. order dated 18.07.2017 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 504 of 2016 and allied matters and also the order dated 08.07.2022 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1411 of 2018 and allied matters. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that they were appointed on the post of Multi-Purpose Health Workers on the basis of diploma course, which they had undertaken from the respondent No. 4-Universities. 5. Learned advocate Mr. Vyas appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the show-cause notices issued to the petitioners are required to be quashed since it is not the case of the respondent No. 4 that they are not recognized universities or diploma certificates, which are issued in favour of the petitioners, are fake or forged. He has further submitted that in fact the Division Benches of this Court has nowhere indicated that the show-cause notices are required to be issued to the petitioners, who have in fact, undergone diploma course from the respondent No. 4-Universities. It is submitted that the show-cause notices are required to be quashed since incorrect facts are recorded in such notice. He has further submitted that in fact the Division Benches of this Court has nowhere indicated that the show-cause notices are required to be issued to the petitioners, who have in fact, undergone diploma course from the respondent No. 4-Universities. It is submitted that the show-cause notices are required to be quashed since incorrect facts are recorded in such notice. It is thus, submitted that in fact the direction is required to be issued on the respondent authorities to declare that the petitioners possess requisite qualification for the appointment to the post of Multi-Purpose Heath Worker, Class-III. He has submitted that the petitioners apprehend that despite the replies given to such show-cause notices, their services may be terminated. In this reference, he has placed reliance on the affidavit filed by the Universities in the earlier round of litigation. Thus, it is submitted that the impugned show-cause notices are required to be quashed since the petitioners have undertaken necessary diploma course from the Universities, which is also recognized. 6. Per contra, learned AGP appearing for the respondent authority has submitted that the writ petitions are not maintainable since the petitioners have challenged the show-cause notices. He has submitted that the entire exercise is undertaken by the respondent authorities in view of the directions issued by the Division Benches of this Court in the aforementioned decisions. He has also submitted that appropriate decisions will be taken in accordance with law, after necessary inquiry has been undertaken by the respondent authorities with regard to verification of their diploma certificates, which have been produced by the petitioners at the time of their appointment. Thus, it is submitted that this Court, at this stage, may not undertake necessary exercise for verification of the certificates issued by the petitioners from the respondent-Universities as it would fall within the authority of the respondents. 7. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and also perused the documents as pointed out by them. 8. The present writ petitions are directed against the show-cause notices issued to the petitioners on 23.11.2022 by the respondent authorities for undertaking necessary exercise for verification of the diploma certificates obtained by them from the respondent- Universities. In the show-cause notices, the respondent authorities have specifically referred to the directions issued by the Division Benches. 8. The present writ petitions are directed against the show-cause notices issued to the petitioners on 23.11.2022 by the respondent authorities for undertaking necessary exercise for verification of the diploma certificates obtained by them from the respondent- Universities. In the show-cause notices, the respondent authorities have specifically referred to the directions issued by the Division Benches. The issue with regard to verification of certificates of such Multi-Purpose Health Workers has been under consideration by two Division Benches of this Court. 9. Initially, the group of petitions were filed by such Multi-Purpose Health Workers before this Court, which culminated into the decision of the Division Bench vide order dated 18.07.2017 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 504 of 2016 and allied matters. There were 04 universities, who had issued diploma/degree, which are doubted by the State authority. The respondent No. 4-Universities are included in such list. The said LPAs were dismissed by the Division Bench by giving certain directions. Thereafter, it appears that again an issue with regard to verification of diploma certificates was examined and finally, the Division Bench in the judgment and order dated 08.07.2022 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1411 of 2018 and allied matters has issued the following directions: “(i) Letters Patent Appeals and Special Civil Applications stand disposed of. (ii) As far as Special Civil Application Nos.7118 of 2020, 7364 of 2020, 10471 of 2019, 17283 of 2018 and 20729 of 2018 are concerned, they are hereby allowed and notice of termination issued to writ applicants is ordered to be treated as show cause notice and reply be submitted by the writ applicants and thereafter, same be adjudicated by respective Panchayats in accordance with law. (iii) Orders passed by the learned Single Judge in setting aside the order of termination are sustained. However, order directing payment of back wages from the date of termination stands modified by directing payment of wages from the date of order of the learned Single and said compliance shall be made within an outer limit of three months from today. (iv) Respective District Panchayats would be at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings, if deemed fit and if so advised, and pass orders after treating the order of termination as show cause notice and on consideration of the reply, pass orders in accordance with law as observed hereinabove. (iv) Respective District Panchayats would be at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings, if deemed fit and if so advised, and pass orders after treating the order of termination as show cause notice and on consideration of the reply, pass orders in accordance with law as observed hereinabove. (v) We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion with regard to correctness, authenticity and validity of Diploma Certificates which came to be produced by the respective writ applicants at the time of their employment and it is open for the respective District Panchayats to pass orders after considering the reply, if any, that would be submitted by the writ applicants. (vi) It is also made clear that where no show cause notice has been issued, respective District Panchayats shall issue show cause notice and after considering the reply, if any, submitted by the writ applicants within the period stipulated under show cause, are empowered to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. However, in respect of those writ applicants to whom show-cause notices have been issued but termination order is based on the internal inquiry report, copy of such report shall be furnished to them to enable them to have their say on the said issue. (vii) Respective writ applicants, who have not yet been reinstated, pursuant to order of the learned Single Judge, shall be reinstated by respective District Panchayats within an outer limit of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (viii) It is also made clear that writ applicants on being served with show cause notice or report, as the case may be, shall extend full co-operation to the District Panchayats in concluding the inquiry and it is needless to state that in the event of any such writ applicants failing to co-operate in the inquiry, appropriate authority would be at liberty to proceed to adjudicate the same in accordance with law.” 10. In paragraph No. 8 of the said order, the Division Bench has recorded 05 universities, which have issued the diploma certificates to the Multi-Purpose Health Workers. The present university i.e. respondent No. 4-OPJS University and Vinayaka Mission University have been mentioned at item No. 3. After considering the respective submissions of the Multi-Purpose Health Workers, as well as the respondent authorities, aforementioned directions are issued. The present university i.e. respondent No. 4-OPJS University and Vinayaka Mission University have been mentioned at item No. 3. After considering the respective submissions of the Multi-Purpose Health Workers, as well as the respondent authorities, aforementioned directions are issued. Pursuant to the directions issued by the Division Bench, the respondent authorities have issued the show-cause notices, which are challenged in the writ petitions. The direction No. VI, which is noted hereinabove, specifically stipulates that the respondent-District Panchayat shall issue show-cause notice to the concerned Multi-Purpose Health Workers for verification of their certificates and hold the departmental inquiry. The direction No. VIII is very specific, which states that the appointment of “Multipurpose Health Workers” on being served with the show-cause notice or report, as the case may be, shall extend full cooperation to the District Panchayats in concluding the inquiry and it is further asserted that in the event of any such writ applicants failing to cooperate in the inquiry, appropriate authority would be at liberty to proceed to adjudicate the same in accordance with law. 11. Thus, this Court cannot issue any direction contrary to the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court by setting aside the show-cause notices at this stage since the petitioners, who have been granted appointment on the basis of the certificates issued by the Universities, the petitioners cannot be allowed to take volte face and challenge the show-cause notices. They have to extend their full cooperation to the respondent authorities to conclude the inquiry, as directed by the Division Bench. 12. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Another vs. Kunnisetty Satyanarayana, (2006) 12 SCC 28 , wherein the Apex Court has held thus: “12. It is well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that ordinarily no writ lies against a charge sheet or show-cause notice vide Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board vs. Ramdesh Kumar Singh and Others, JT 1995 (8) SC 331, Special Director and Another vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and Another, AIR 2004 SC 1467 , Ulagappa and Others vs. Divisional Commissioner, Mysore and Others, 2001 (10) SCC 639 , State of U.P. vs. Brahm Datt Sharma and Another, AIR 1987 SC 943 etc. Ghulam Ghouse and Another, AIR 2004 SC 1467 , Ulagappa and Others vs. Divisional Commissioner, Mysore and Others, 2001 (10) SCC 639 , State of U.P. vs. Brahm Datt Sharma and Another, AIR 1987 SC 943 etc. The reason why ordinarily a writ petition should not be entertained against a mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet is that at that stage the writ petition may be held to be premature. A mere charge-sheet or show-cause notice does not give rise to any cause of action, because it does not amount to an adverse order which affects the rights of any party unless the same has been issued by a person having no jurisdiction to do so. It is quite possible that after considering the reply to the show-cause notice or after holding an enquiry the authority concerned may drop the proceedings and/or hold that the charges are not established. It is well settled that a writ lies when some right of any party is infringed. A mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet does not infringe the right of any one. It is only when a final order imposing some punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, that the said party can be said to have any grievance. 13. Writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction and hence such discretion under Article 226 should not ordinarily be exercised by quashing a show-cause notice or charge-sheet.” 13. The Apex Court thus, has held that all the writ petitions may not be entertained against a mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet since, at this stage, the writ petitions are held to be premature and charge-sheet or show-cause notice does not give rise to any cause of action, which affects the rights of any party unless the same is issued by a person having no jurisdiction. 14. In the present case, the entire exercise, which is undertaken pursuant to the directions issued by the Division Benches cannot be scuttled by entertaining such writ petitions. 15. The present writ petitions are rejected, summarily. It is clarified that the observations made in the present order may not be construed adverse to the writ petitioners in ongoing inquiry proceedings. 16. Registry to place a copy of this order in the connected matter.