- (1.) Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 15.07.2015 (Annexure P-5), through which, his services as a Driver (heavy transport vehicle) have been terminated. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to reinstate him with full back wages along with continuity in service and other consequential benefits. The basic facts, which need to be noticed for adjudicating upon the instant writ petition, are that in December 2012, the State Transport Department, Government of Haryana, invited applications for appointment of Heavy Vehicle Drivers (on contract basis). The prescribed qualifications were that a candidate should be Matriculate with Hindi/Sanskrit from a recognized Board or University, should be holding a valid transport vehicle driving license and having a minimum of two years' experience of driving a heavy goods vehicle including proficiency in driving heavy passenger motor vehicle or ten years' experience in driving a vehicle in the Armed Forces.
(2.) In pursuance to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner applied for consideration of his candidature and being successful in the selection process, was offered appointment, however, with the following rider incorporated in the terms of his appointment :- "Attested copies of educational and professional qualifications and Matriculation certificates shall be furnished. The documents pertaining to your qualification, experience, age and caste/category, as claimed by you in the application form shall be got checked/verified by the concerned General Manager, Haryana Roadways. If it is found that there is material discrepancy in the educational/professional qualifications, age, caste, reservation benefit under Exserviceman or outstanding sportsman etc. and experience that you had claimed in the application then this offer of appointment shall be treated as null and void." A perusal of the afore-quoted term and condition of appointment show that the appointment of the petitioner was subject to the verification of his submitted documents and if it was found that there was any material discrepancy in the educational/professional qualifications etc., as claimed by him, then the offer of appointment would be treated as null and void.
(3.) The record reveals that after the verification of the petitioner's Matriculation Certificate (Annexure P-3), it was found that the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Board), from where the petitioner had claimed to have passed his Matriculation examination, was not recognized. On that basis, a Show Cause Notice was issued to him as to why, as per the terms of his appointment, his services may not be dispensed with, to which he filed a reply, after consideration of which, the impugned order, terminating the services of the petitioner, was passed. After considering the submissions made by the parties and perusing the record, I am of the opinion that the present petition must fail. As per the terms of eligibility prescribed in the advertisement, only those candidates, who had passed their Matriculation examination from a recognized Board, were to be considered eligible for appointment. On the repeated queries posed by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner was not able to show any document by any statutory Authority granting recognition to the Board, from where the petitioner claims to have passed his Matriculation examination. Rather, a perusal of the affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India in a connected matter being C. W. P. No. 17499 of 2015 Raffik Mohmad vs. State of Haryana and others, to which there is no rebuttal by the petitioner, shows that the Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi, from which the petitioner claims to have passed his Matriculation examination, is not recognized by the Ministry of Human Resources and Development, Government of India. The relevant portion of the affidavit is reproduced below for ready reference :- "4. That the three Education Boards, namely Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Bharat, Gwalior, Board of Higher Secondary Education, New Delhi and Council of Secondary Education, Mohali, as mentioned in the order dated 01.10.2015 (Annexure-A1) of this Hon'ble Court are neither set up nor recognized by MHRD. 5. That MHRD, in order to ensure that innocent students do not become victim of unscrupulous and illegal activities of fake/unrecognised boards, had issued an advisory on 20.11.2008 (Annexure-A3) to all Education Secretaries of the State Governments and Union Territories and Chairpersons of CBSE and NIOS for prevention of functioning of fake boards within their defined territorial jurisdiction, as stipulated in the State Education Acts or Rules. It is thus imperative that every State and Union Territory ought to have a provision to regulate recognition of Education Boards, conduct of public examination and issue of certificates by such Boards. The States/UTs are expected to function as watchdogs so that fake institutions, calling themselves examination boards and issuing certificates, do not operate under their territorial jurisdiction and if any such Boards exist, they should have appropriate mechanism to deal with such fake Boards.";