P.K.S.Baghel, J. - (1.) BY way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of the District Basic Education Officer, Kannauj dated 23.2.2008 whereby his services as Assistant Teacher in a Primary School has been terminated on the ground that he obtained appointment on the basis of a fabricated mark-sheet.
(2.) HEARD Sri G.K.Singh learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.Shahi learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and Sri Neeraj Tewari learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. The short facts are these, in the year 2004, an advertisement was issued for selection of Assitant Teachers in Primary Schools run by the Board. The petitioner states that he had essential qualifications mentioned in the Advertisement and relevant rules. He submitted his application in response to the Advertisement and was found suitable. Thereafter, on 30.12.2005 he was selected and appointed as Assistant Teacher in Prathmik Vidyalaya Chatorapur, Vikas Khand Haseran district Kannauj. Since then he was working as Assistant Teacher. However, to his utter shock and dismay he received a show-cause notice dated 8.1.2007 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) wherein it was alleged that at the time of his appointment he had submitted forged mark-sheet of B.A. As stated by the petitioner he did his B.A. in the year 1994, from the Chatrapati Shivaji Sahuji Mahraj University, Kanpur. It appears that the respondents verified the mark-sheet of the petitioner from the University. On verification the University informed the respondents that petitioner has secured 425 marks and not 439 marks. However, in the mark-sheet submitted by him the marks have been shown to be 439 marks. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show-cause notice on 15.1.2007 wherein he has stated that the Registrar of the said University has informed him that in Military Science 2nd paper the Examiner had erroneously awarded him 22 marks under the wrong impression that the total marks of the said subject was 50, whereas the said paper was only of 33 marks. The Examiner had committed inadvertent mistake in respect of all the students and as such the proportionate marks have been reduced of all the students including the petitioner.
(3.) EARLIER the petitioner was awarded 22 marks, however, after the correction his marks has been reduced to 15 marks. Thus the total marks which in the mark- sheet was shown to be 439 was corrected to 425. Without taking into consideration petitioner's reply the BSA has passed the impugned order 23.2.2008 whereby, his appointment has been cancelled on the ground of fraud and a recovery for the salary was issued and a further order was issued for lodging an First Information Report against him. The University has filed a counter- affidavit wherein it is stated that the maximum marks in Military Science paper was 33 but the Examiner treating the same to be 50 marks has awarded 22 marks to the petitioner. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the counter-affidavit of the University is extracted hereunder below: That in the year 1996 in B.A. 3rd year examination the maximum marks in Military Science second paper was 33, but the examiner treating the same to be 50 marks, has awarded 22 marks to the petitioner and accordingly mark-sheet on 30.11.1994 was issued, which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. After some time this mistake was found and the same was rectified by the decreasing the marks of the petitioner treating total marks to be 33 and accordingly the second mark-sheet was issued to the petitioner. That this fact was also sent to the District Basic Education Officer vide letter dated 12.7.2007, which is Annexure-6 to the writ petition. It is further relevant to mention here that the petitioner is not at fault at any stage and due to bona fide mistake of the examiner, this controversy has arisen and the petitioner was earlier issued mark-sheet on 30.11.1994 which is in dispute.";