Prakash Padia,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Grijesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri Shyam Krishna Gupta, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4.
(2.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging the order dated 30.07.2020 passed by the respondent no. 3 namely District Basic Education Officer, Deoria, copy of which is appended as Annexure-6 to the writ petition.
(3.) By means of the impugned order, the petitioner has not only been dismissed from the service but also recovery has been directed from the petitioner for the salary that has been paid to him since his initial appointment as an Assistant Teacher and to lodge an F.I.R., Following arguments were raised by the counsel for the petitioner namely: (i) The order has been passed without following the procedure prescribed under U.P. Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973 which provides for application of U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules,1999; (ii) The major penalty of dismissal from service on the basis of findings of misconduct for fraud or forgery can only be imposed only after a full fledged enquiry is held as contemplated under 1999 Enquiry Rules; and (iii) Once the verification of the documents was done by the respondents at the time of the initial appointment and it is after due verification of these documents, that appointment was offered to the petitioner, the respondents could not have gone into the question of genuineness of the documents at this belated stage i.e. almost after twelve years. ;