AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J
Petitioners, in both these writ petitions, have challenged their respective termination orders whereby their services on the post of Assistant Teachers were declared void ab initio since its commencement.
Impugned orders are effectively similarly worded, therefore, after deleting the name of petitioner, operative part of one of the impugned order is reproduced hereinafter:
"उपरोक्त वर्णित तथ्यों एवं निष्कर्ष के आधार पर स्पष्ट है, कि श्री XXX बी०टी०सी० योग्यताधारी अभ्यर्थी है। बी०टी०सी० अभ्यर्थियों के लिए 15000 स०अ० भर्ती के खोले गये प्रथम चरण मे आपने बी०टी०सी० आर्हता प्राप्त न होने के कारण आवेदन नही किया। श्री XXX सहायक अध्यापक प्राथमिक विद्यालय खानपुर विकासखण्ड बिलारी के द्वारा डी०एड०(विशेष शिक्षा) अर्हताधारियों के लिए खोले गये द्वितीय चरण में बी०टी०सी० प्रशिक्षण अर्हता पूर्ण किये बिना ही दिनांक 27.04.2015 को रजिस्ट्रेशन किया है, जबकि बी०टी०सी० का परिणाम दिनांक 29.04.2015 को घोषित हुआ है। आप द्वारा निर्धारित शैक्षिक अर्हता प्राप्त किये बिना ही रजिस्ट्रेशन / आवेदन करना प्रशिक्षण योजना के काल्पनिक एवं त्रुटिपूर्ण अंको का अंकन करने, चयन प्रक्रिया में भ्रामांक सूचनाए देने, भर्ती प्रक्रिया में तथ्य गोपन कर कूटरचना कर चयन के लिए कुत्सित प्रयास करने या शासनादेश एवं विभागीय नियमों के विरुद्ध सहायक अध्यापक पद पर चयन प्राप्त करने के लिए आप पूर्ण रूप से दोषी है। अतः श्री XXX सहायक अध्यापक प्राथमिक विद्यालय खानपुर वि०ख० बिलारी की इस कार्यालय के आदेश स०बे०प्र०/5215-5221/2016-17 दिनाक 02.07.2016 के द्वारा की गयी नियुक्ति प्रारम्भ से ही शून्य (Void abintio) कर निरस्त करते हुए , नियुक्ति तिथि से इनकी सेवाएं समाप्त की जी है।"
(Emphasis supplied)
This Court proceed to consider the rival submissions on basis of an undisputed fact that petitioners have filled and submitted their online forms disclosing wrongly that on date of submission of their online forms, they have passed their respective BTC Course as well as they have wrongly mentioned their marks obtained in BTC Course despite results were not announced. The Court also proceed on basis that all petitioners have subsequently passed their BTC Course within few days of submission of their online form and later on opening a window have made corrections in their respective application form also.
Facts of the case, which led to filing of these two writ petitions, in brief, are that State Government has issued Government Order dated 09.12.2014 whereby applications for recruitment of 15,000 Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic Schools run by Board of Basic Education, U.P. were invited. Thereafter a circular dated 11.12.2014 was issued disclosing time table for submission of forms etc. Admittedly petitioners have not submitted their online forms as they were not eligible on given date. For reference said circular, in its entirety, is reproduced hereinafter:
"प्रेषक,
सचिव,
उत्तर प्रदेश बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद,
इलाहाबाद।
सेवा में,
जिला बेसिक शिक्षा अधिकारी
उत्तर प्रदेश।
पत्रांक बे०शि०प०/12606-12684/2014-15 दिनांक-11.12.14
विषयः- उत्तर प्रदेश बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के पदों पर द्विवर्षीय बी०टी०सी०/ विशिष्ट बी०टी०सी०/द्विवर्षीय बी०टी०सी० उर्दू प्रवीणताधारी अभ्यर्थियों के चयन/नियुक्ति के संबंध में।
महोदय,
उपर्युक्त विषयक शासनादेश संख्या-5041/79-5-2014-14(10)/2010 दिनांक 09.12.2014 का सन्दर्भ ग्रहण करने का कष्ट करें जिसके द्वारा उ०प्र० बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में सहायक अध्यापकों के रिक्त पदो पर 15000 सहायक अध्यापको की ऑनलाइन ई-आवेदन के माध्यम से चयन/नियुक्ति की अनुमति प्रदान की गयी है। परिषदीय प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के चयन/नियुक्ति हेतु ऐसे अभ्यर्थियों द्वारा ऑनलाइन ई-आवेदन लिये जाने के निर्देश दिये गये है जो भारत में विधि द्वारा स्थापित विश्वविद्यालय से स्नातक के साथ द्विवर्षीय बी०टी०सी०/विशिष्ट बी०टी०सी/द्विवर्षीय उर्दू प्रवीणता बी०टी०सी० प्रशिक्षण उत्तीर्ण किये हों, एवं उ०प्र० सरकार अथवा भारत सरकार द्वारा आयोजित कक्षा 1-5 हेतु अध्यापक पात्रता परीक्षा सफलतापूर्वक उत्तीर्ण कर चुके हों। उक्त चयन/नियुक्ति कार्यक्रम हेतु निम्नलिखित समय सारिणी निर्धारित की गयी हैः-
अतएव संलग्न शासनादेश में वर्णित व्यवस्था/दिशानिर्देशों के अनुरूप परिषदीय प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में सहायक अध्यापकों के पदों पर चयन/नियुक्ति किये जाने हेतु प्रत्येक जनपद के जिला बेसिक शिक्षा अधिकारी को इस आशय से प्रेषित कि उपलब्ध करायी जा रही विज्ञप्ति को प्रत्येक दशा में दिनांक 09.12.2014 को कम से कम दो समाचार पत्रों के प्रादेशिक संस्करण में आवंटित पदों का उल्लेख करते हुए प्रकाशित कराना सुनिश्चित करें। यहां यह भी उल्लेखनीय है कि 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों की नियुक्ति हेतु अभ्यर्थी किसी एक जनपद में निर्धारित शुल्क( धनराशि सामान्य वर्ग/अन्य पिछडा वर्ग के लिए रू० 500/- अनुसूचित जाति/जनजाति के लिए रू० 200/- तथा विकलांगजन हेतु निःशुल्क) का भुगतान कर अन्य जनपदों में भी उक्त के आधार पर आवेदन कर सकता है। नियुक्ति हेतु शैक्षिक अर्हता, आरक्षण, आयु सीमा, चयन प्रक्रिया इत्यादि पूर्व में सम्पादित 10000 सहायक अध्यापकों के नियुक्ति हेतु निर्गत शासनादेश – 3774/79-5-2013-14(10)10 दिनांक 15 अक्टूबर 2013 में निहित प्राविधानों के अनुरूप होगी।
उपर्युक्त चयन/नियुक्ति सम्बन्धी कार्यवाही अत्यन्त महत्वपूर्ण एवं समयबद्ध कार्यक्रम है जिसमे किसी भी प्रकार की लापरवाही एवं शिथिलता स्वीकार नहीं की जायेगी। यहाँ यह भी ध्यान रखा जाना आवश्यक है कि चयन/नियुक्ति की कार्यवाही अत्यन्त शुचितापूर्ण एवं पारदर्शी ढंग से सम्पन्न की जाए तथा चयन/नियुक्ति प्रदान करने हेतु निर्गत शासनादेश का सम्यक अनुपालन किया जाए। साथ ही नियुक्ति प्रदान करने के पूर्व यह भी सुनिश्चित कर लिया जाए कि यदि किसी भी अभ्यर्थी द्वारा कूटरचित अभिलेखों के आधार पर नियुक्ति पाने का प्रयास किया जाता है तो उसके विरूद्ध तत्काल आवश्यक विधिक कार्यवाही करते हुए प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट दर्ज करा दी जाए।" (Emphasis supplied)
There was a litigation with regard to said recruitment which reached upto this Court in Writ - A No. - 533 of 2015, (Devendra Narayan Pandey and others vs. State of U.P. and others), which was decided on 02.02.2015 and accordingly a corrigendum dated 09.04.2015 was issued with regard to eligibility of D.Ed. Aforesaid corrigendum, in its entirety, is also reproduced hereinafter:
"उत्तर प्रदेश शासन
शिक्षा अनुभाग-5
संख्या - 1069/79-5-2015
लखनऊ दिनांक- 09 अप्रैल – 2015
संशोधन – विज्ञप्ति
रिट याचिका संख्या-533/2015 देवेन्द्र नारायण पाण्डेय व 93 अन्य बनाम उ0प्र0 सरकार व अन्य में पारित मा० उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश दिनांक 02.02.2015 के अनुपालन में उत्तर प्रदेश बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित विद्यालयों में 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के चयन के सम्बन्ध में निर्गत शासनादेश संख्या-472(ii) 79-5-2015 दिनांक 08.04.2015 के प्रस्तर-4 में प्राविधानित है कि-
"…...मा० उच्च न्यायालय के उपर्युक्त आदेशों के अनुपालन में सम्यक विचारोपरान्त उ०प्र० बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में सहायक अध्यापकों के 15000 रिक्त पदों के सापेक्ष गतिमान चयन प्रकिया में डी०एड० प्रशिक्षण अर्हता को सम्मिलत किये जाने एंव उक्त प्रक्रिया हेतुं 30-04-2015 तक का समय प्रदान किये जाने का निर्णय लिया गया है।
2- इस सम्बन्ध में उपरोक्त शासनादेश उक्त के स्थान पर निम्नवत पढ़ा जायेगाः-
"... मा० उच्च न्यायालय के उपर्युक्त आदेशों के अनुपालन में सम्यक विचारोपरान्त उ०प्र० बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में सहायक अध्यापकों के 15000 रिक्त पदों के सापेक्ष गतिमान चयन प्रकिया में डी०एड० (विशेष शिक्षा) प्रशिक्षण अर्हता को सम्मिलित किये जाने एवं उक्त प्रकिया हेतु दिनांक 30.04.2015 तक का समय प्रदान किये जाने का निर्णय लिया गया है।
3- शासनादेश संख्या-472(ii) 79-5-2015 दिनांक 08.04.2015 उक्त सीमा तक संशोधित समझा जाये।" (Emphasis supplied)
In pursuance of above corrigendum a fresh timeline of submission of forms was also issues, which is reproduced hereinafter:
"उ०प्र० बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के पदों पर भर्ती-
वर्ष (2014-2015)
The petitioners have submitted their online forms for registration on 27.04.2015 disclosing marks in BTC though admittedly results were announced after few days. It is the case of petitioners that it was mandatory to fill details of BTC for registration online. It is further case of petitioners that by way of present time schedule fresh registrations were also invited and that window opened was not limited for applicants who passed D.Ed. only.
A further notification dated 16.04.2015 was issued wherein an opportunity was granted to applicants who have already submitted their forms on website to upload corrections between 01.05.2015 to 07.05.2015. Relevant part thereof is mentioned hereinafter:
"अतएव ऐसे डी०एड०(विशेष शिक्षा) प्रशिक्षण उपाधिधारी जिन्होने 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के चयन प्रक्रिया में अब तक आवेदन नहीं किया है, वे आवेदन हेतु निर्दिष्ट वेबसाइट upbasiceduparishad.gov.in पर निर्धारित प्रक्रियानुसार दिनांक 17.04.2015 से 30.04.2015 के मध्य आनलाइन आवेदन कर सकते है। ऐसे अभ्यर्थी जो पूर्व में आवेदन कर चुके हैं, वे निर्धारित वेबसाइट पर प्रक्रियानुसार भरे गये ऑनलाइन आवेदन पत्र में दिनांक 01.05.2015 से 07.05.2015 सांय 5 बजे के मध्य त्रुटि सुधार कर सकेंगे।"
Another notification was issued on 06.07.2015 whereby permission was accorded to candidates who have passed Special BTC- 2004, 2007 and 2008 and such candidates who were within permissible age limit as on 01.07.2015 to submit application forms.
Thereafter a fresh time schedule was issued on 31.08.2015 which was followed by Circular dated 10.10.2015. For reference the same is reproduced hereinafter:
"प्रेषक,
सचिव,
उत्तर प्रदेश बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद,
इलाहाबाद।
सेवा में,
समस्त जिला बेसिक शिक्षा अधिकारी
उत्तर प्रदेश।
पत्रांक बे०शि०प०/10960-11129 / 2015-16 दिनांक 10-10-15
विषय:- उ०प्र० बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद द्वारा संचालित परिषदीय प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में 15,000 सहायक अध्यापकों की नियुक्ति के सम्बन्ध में।
महोदय,
कृपया शासनादेश संख्या-5041/79-5-2014-14(10)/2010 दिनांक 09-12-2014. शासनादेश संख्या-1069/79-5-2015 दिनांक 09-04-2015, शासनादेश संख्या-1541/79-5-2015 दिनांक 02 जून 2015 एवं शासनादेश संख्या-1965/79-5-2015-14(10)/2010 दिनाक 06.07.2015 का सन्दर्भ ग्रहण करने का कष्ट करें जिसके अनुक्रम में परिषदीय प्राथमिक विद्यालयों के 15000 सहायक अध्यापक पद पर नियुक्ति हेतु ऑनलाइन आवेदन लिये जाने की कार्यवाही की गयी है।
उक्त के क्रम में निर्देशित किया जाता है कि 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के नियुक्ति हेतु मेरिट सूची तैयार कर काउन्सिलिंग की कार्यवाही निम्नवत् प्रकियानुसार की जानी है-
1- 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों की नियुक्ति हेतु उपर्युक्त शासनादेशों के क्रम में तीन चक्रों में एन०आई०सी० द्वारा विकसित वेबसाइट http:// upbasiceduparishad.gov.in पर ऑनलाइन आवेदन प्राप्त किये गये। एन०आई०सी० द्वारा मेरिट सूची तैयार करने हेतु ऑनलाइन आवेदन करने वाले 45546 अभ्यर्थियों की मदर लिस्ट एवं 417 अभ्यर्थियों की निरस्त सूची उपलब्ध करायी गयी है।
2- जनपद स्तर पर मेरिट सूची तैयार करने सम्बन्धी समस्त कार्य मदर लिस्ट पर किया जायेगा। निरस्त सूची को सुलभ सन्दर्भ हेतु सुरक्षित रखा जायेगा। यहाँ यह विशेष रूप से उल्लेखनीय है कि 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के नियुक्ति हेतु अभ्यर्थियों द्वारा एक ही आवेदन पत्र भरा गया है। ऐसी स्थिति में प्रत्येक जनपद में सभी अभ्यर्थियों से सम्बन्धित एक्सेल डाटा उपलब्ध कराया जा रहा है। 3- शासनादेश संख्या-5041/79-5-2014-14(10)/2010 दिनांक 09-12-2014 के क्रम में पहली बार (बी०टी०सी०, वि०बी०टी०सी०, उर्दू बी०टी०सी०) उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों से ऑनलाइन आवेदन मांगे गये, तदोपरान्त द्वितीय चक्र में केवल डी०एड० (विशेष शिक्षा) वाले अभ्यर्थियों से एवं तृतीय चक्र में मा० उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा पारित आदेश के अनुपालन हेतु शासनादेश संख्या-1541/79-5-2015 दिनांक 02 जून 2015 के क्रम में अनुवर्ती वर्ष के आधार पर सम्मिलित होने वाले, शासनादेश संख्या- 1965/79-5-2015-14(10)/2010 दिनांक 06.07.2015 के क्रम में वि०बी०टी०सी० 2004, 2007 एवं 2008 उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों से ऑनलाइन आवेदन मांगे गये थे। ऐसी स्थिति में मदर लिस्ट में तीन चक्रों में उपर्युक्त शासनादेशों की शर्तों से भिन्न अभ्यर्थियों के आवेदन को निरस्त करते हुए अवशेष अभ्यर्थियों के एक्सेल डाटा पर मेरिट सूची तैयार की जायेगी।
4- मदर लिस्ट के निरस्त किये गये अभ्यर्थियों को अलग करने के उपरान्त अवशेष अभ्यर्थियों में से अपने प्रशिक्षण जनपद / डी०एड० (विशेष शिक्षा) वाले अभ्यर्थियों के प्रथम वरीयता जनपद के अभ्यर्थियों के एक्सेल डाटा से अनन्तिम चयन सूची तैयार करते हुए प्रथम चक्र की काउन्सिलिंग प्रकाशन के तिथि को ही वापस कर दिये जाये जिससे वह किसी अन्य जनपद में काउन्सिलिंग में प्रतिभाग कर सके।
उक्त चयन/नियुक्ति प्रक्रिया निर्धारित कार्यक्रमानुसार शासनादेश में निहित प्राविधानों के अनुरूप शुचितापूर्ण एवं पारदर्शी ढंग से सम्पादित की जानी है. इसमे किसी भी प्रकार की लापरवाही/शिथिलता स्वीकार नहीं की जायेगी।"
In pursuance of above circular a fresh timeline was issued for candidates to submit application forms between 02.09.2015 to 11.09.2015. Meanwhile, another litigation came up before this Court challenging contents of above referred circular dated 10.10.2015 in Writ-A No. 59443 of 2015 (Anil Kumar Maurya and others vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein interim orders were passed on 15.10.2015 and 18.12.2015.
Meanwhile, on 04.12.2015 another notification was issued whereby opportunity to submit application form was afforded between 14.12.2015 to 28.12.2015 to such candidates who have passed Bachelor of Elementary Education Degree in pursuance of a judgment passed by this Court on 23.02.2015 in Writ-A No. 1205 of 2015 (Kuldeep Kumar Patel and others vs. State of U.P. and others).
Thereafter on 18.12.2015 State Government issued Government order specifying common date for submission of forms on 15.01.2016 followed by another notification dated 28.12.2015 as well as a fresh time schedule was also issued to submit forms between 30.12.2015 to 15.01.2016 with specific note that cut off date for eligibility was fixed to be 15.01.2016. The above referred Government Order dated 18.12.2015 was challenged before Lucknow Bench of this Court in Service Single No. 326 of 2016 (Mahendra Pratap Singh and others vs. State of U.P. and others) but the same was dismissed by order dated 18.04.2016 and thereafter counselling was held. For reference notification dated 28.12.2015 and fresh time schedule are mentioned hereinafter:
"कार्यालय सचिव उत्तर प्रदेश बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद, इलाहाबाद
पत्रांकः बे०शि०प०/15351/2015-16 दिनांक: 28.12.2015
विज्ञप्ति
शासनादेश संख्या-3640/79-5~2015-14(10)/2010 दिनांक 18.12.2015 का सन्दर्भ ग्रहण करने का कष्ट करें जिसके द्वारा मा० उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा रिट याचिका संख्या-59443/2015 अनिल कुमार मौर्या व अन्य बनाम उ०प्र० राज्य व अन्य में पारित आदेश के अनुपालन में 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों की गतिमान चयन प्रक्रिया में इच्छुक बी०टी०सी०, वि०बी०टी०सी०, उर्दू बी०टी०सी०, डी०एड० (विशेष शिक्षा) एवं बी०एल०एड० अभ्यर्थियों के आवेदन हेतु ऑनलाइन आवेदन प्रक्रिया को 15 जनवरी, 2016 तक बढ़ाने के निर्देश दिये गये हैं।
अतएव ऐसे इच्छुक उपर्युक्त प्रशिक्षण उपाधिधारी अभ्यर्थी जो 15 जनवरी 2016 तक समस्त आवश्यक अहंतायें धारित करते हो, 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के चयन प्रक्रिया में आवेदन हेतु निर्दिष्ट देवसाइट upbasiceduparishad.gov.in पर निर्धारित प्रक्रियानुसार दिनांक 30.12.2015 से 15.01.2016 के मध्य ऑनलाइन आवेदन की प्रक्रिया पूर्ण कर सकते हैं। परिषदीय प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में चयन/नियुक्ति हेतु अन्य शर्तें / अहंता पूर्व में दिये गये शासनादेश संख्या-5041/79-5-2014-14(10) /2010 दिनाँक 09-12-2014 के अनुरूप होगी।
उक्त चयन प्रक्रिया में केवल ऐसे अभ्यर्थियों द्वारा आवेदन किया जायेगा जिन्होंने अब तक 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों की नियुक्ति हेत ऑनलाइन आवेदन नहीं किया है। ऐसे अभ्यर्थी जो पूर्व में 15000 सहायक अध्यापकों के चयन हेतु निर्गत विज्ञप्तियों के सापेक्ष आवेदन कर चुके है उन्हें पुनः आवेदन करने की आवश्यकता नहीं है।
सचिव, उत्तर प्रदेश बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद,
इलाहाबाद।"
(Emphasis supplied)
"प्रक्रिया में शासनादेश संख्या 3640/79-5-2015
-14(10)/2010 दिनांक 18/12/2015 के क्रम में
ऑनलाइन आवेदन प्रणाली
So far as petitioners are concerned, admittedly they have not submitted their forms in pursuance of Government Order dated 09.12.2014 since they were not eligible. However, when time schedule was extended by Government Order dated 09.04.2015, petitioners who were under BTC Training, got registered themselves on 28.04.2015, i.e., two days before their result were likely to be announced.
It is the case of petitioners that since the forms with vacant columns with regard to details of BTC could not be submitted, therefore, they have entered some imaginary numericals. It is further case of petitioners that when opportunity was granted by circular dated 16.04.2015 to make corrections in online application upto 07.05.2015 they have made corrections and mentioned correct marks got in their BTC Course. It is further case of petitioners that their marks were verified and there is no case of any forgery and being eligible, they were duly selected. They got appointment orders on 02.07.2016 and started to impart their duties and got salary also.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Himanshu Singh, Advocate and Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vineet Kumar Singh, Advocate for petitioners, in above referred petitions, have submitted that an inquiry was initiated and similarly worded show cause notices / charge sheets were issued to petitioners mainly on ground that when they have submitted their online forms on 27.04.2015 result of BTC Course 2015 was not announced and it was announced later on 29.04.2015, therefore, they were not eligible for appointment since they have not possessed requisite eligibility qualification on date of registration and further a window was opened for candidates who possessed D.Ed. qualification and not for other candidates. Petitioners have submitted their respective reply, however, as referred above, their reply were not found satisfactory and on above referred grounds their selection were held void ab initio.
Learned Senior Advocates further submitted that incorrect information submitted at the time of submission of online forms was only for the purpose that their online forms may be got registered as their result was about to be declared within two days. The petitioners have made correction as an opportunity was granted by respondents later on. There is no dispute that when petitioners were appointed they have duly eligible for the post. Merit list was prepared on basis of marks obtained.
Both learned Senior Advocates have vehemently submitted that in the process of recruitment various orders were passed by this Court and respondents have extended last date of submission of forms on many occasions. Even they allowed fresh applications also. Therefore, there is no prejudice caused to anyone. Petitioners were duly eligible when merit list was prepared and even after two days of submission of online forms. Both learned Senior Advocates have drawn attention of this Court on judgments passed by this Court with regard to earlier litigation.
Per contra, Sri Shashi Prakash Singh, Sri Ashish Kumar Nagwanshi and Sri Ravi Prakash Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents, Ms. Akanksha Sharma, Advocate for Respondents-3 and 4 and Sri Rishi Srivastava, Advocate for newly impleaded Respondents-5 to 25, have submitted that advertisement and notifications specifically state that on the date of submission of online form, applicants have to possess requisite eligibility and admittedly petitioners’ result of BTC Course, when they have submitted their online forms, was not announced. They further referred the application forms of petitioners annexed alongwith writ petitions that knowingly that they have not passed BTC Course on the date when online form was submitted still, in order to mislead the authorities, have filled imaginary marks in front of details of BTC column. Petitioners’ intention since inception was not bona fide and it could be cured later on, though undisputedly later on (within two days) they possessed requisite qualification.
Learned counsel appearing for newly impleaded respondents submitted that petitioners got appointment on the basis of fraud and fraud vitiates every solemn act. Newly impleaded respondents’ right to get appointment were not considered despite they are just below the petitioners in merit list and in case writ petitions are dismissed, the claim of newly impleaded respondents be considered in accordance with their own merit. Learned counsel also submitted that a detailed inquiry report was submitted against the petitioners but it was not challenged, therefore, no relief could be granted. He referred some portion of inquiry report. The window opened by respondents was limited to some applicants and it was not opened for petitioners. Pattern of filling up forms also creates doubt since there were many similarities.
In regard to above submission, learned Senior Advocates submitted that there is no legal argument to challenge inquiry report since petitioners have challenged final adverse impugned order. The factual aspect of inquiry report is not under dispute except that, window was opened for all applicants and later on permission was granted for correction also. This specifically includes BTC also (See para 13 of this judgment). Learned counsel for State-Respondents has not disputed the above referred factual aspect, when during hearing asked a specific query on this issue.
Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available on record.
As referred above, during long recruitment process various orders were passed by this Court which led issuance of several Government Orders and Circulars. The time schedule of submitting application forms and other formalities were re-scheduled on atleast 2-3 occasions. Even the applications were allowed to be submitted from other candidates who have possessed different qualifications also. Therefore, it can be said that even who have qualified during this long process were allowed to participate in recruitment process. A reference on a notification dated 28.12.2015, referred above, would be relevant as it allowed the candidates to participate in selection process if they possess essential qualification as on 15.01.2016, i.e., much after petitioners possessed essential qualification.
There is no dispute that petitioners were qualified within 2-3 days after they have submitted online forms. Later on petitioners have also made corrections in application forms with regard to their respective numbers in BTC Course. In the given circumstances, if petitioners have applied later on their candidature could not be rejected on ground that they have not possessed BTC Course. There is no dispute that merit list was prepared on basis of petitioners’ result in BTC Course and other factors.
This led to narrow down the controversy before this Court that, admittedly petitioners’ act was not bona fide when they submitted their initial online forms for registration and wrongly disclosed that they have passed BTC Course and also wrongly disclosed their marks in BTC Course though they have passed BTC Course after few days of registration and later on they have made corrections in this regard also when an opportunity was granted. Therefore, issue now before this Court is, whether such act would be sufficient to hold that since they were not qualified on the date of registration and they have misrepresented also, their appointments were rightly declared void ab initio or not?
It cannot be disputed that “fraud vitiates every solemn act”. In normal circumstances this Court would not hesitate to take a view that since petitioners have submitted wrong information in their forms at the stage of registration and their act was not bona fide since inception, therefore, they are not entitled to remain in service. However, in peculiar circumstances of present case where due to intervention of this Court at various stages, State-Respondents have issued many circulars and extended the arena of submitting forms and even invited fresh applications also by a notification dated 28.12.2015 extending cut off date for possessing eligibility upto 15.01.2016 as well as already provided a window for correction, therefore, taking note that petitioners have duly qualified and there is no complaint after their appointment and they were qualified even before the extended date of submission of forms and date of correction and as such, in these circumstances the Court is of the view that in the interest of justice, a sympathetic and lenient view be taken.
In view of above discussion, the argument raised on behalf of newly impleaded respondents is also liable to be rejected as they are harping only on a condition if petitioners’ case is rejected. In view of above discussion, judgment cited by counsels are distinguishable on facts.
In view of above, since the reasons given in impugned order to declare appointment of the petitioners void ab initio have already been cured by subsequent events whereby respondents have allowed even the candidates who have later on passed BTC Course and other Courses also and petitioners have already been punished since they have approached this Court and have suffered also being out of service for sufficient period, therefore, in view of aforesaid peculiar circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that impugned orders are liable to be set aside.
Accordingly impugned orders dated 05.09.2023 and 08.09.2023 are hereby set aside. Respondents are directed to permit petitioners to join their services at their respective places within three weeks from today. Petitioners are directed to submit separate certified copy of this judgment within a week from today.
The writ petitions are disposed of with further direction that from the period of impugned orders till the date of joining, since petitioners have not worked, therefore, in view of principle of “no work no pay” they will not be entitled for salary for that period, however, their services will be treated in continuity on notional basis.
In aforesaid circumstances, it is also observed that in further recruitment process a column, namely, “status of result” may also be included in the application form so as to facilitate the candidates whose result are awaited and likely to be declared in a short period, if there is no legal impediment.