- (1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 15.7.1992 (Annexure-1) and with a prayer for directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner back in service with all consequential benefits.
(2.) Facts in brief are that after facing due selection process, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Teacher Gr.III and was posted at Government Upper Primary School, Arnod, Dist. Chittorgarh. The petitioner, while seeking appointment, submitted a B.Ed. degree which he claimed to have obtained from the Poorvanchal University, Jaunpur, U.P. The petitioner was confirmed on the post on 25.1.1992. The degrees held by the petitioner and two other similarly placed candidates had been forwarded by the District Education Officer for verification to the University from where a communication dated 25.05.1992 was received conveying that the B.Ed. degrees submitted by the candidates including the petitioner were forged and fabricated. The District Education Officer, upon receiving the said intimation, issued a notice Annexure- 7 dated 25.06.1992 to the petitioner under Rule 35B of the Rajasthan Service Rules and the Government decision taken thereunder requiring him to show cause as to why his erroneous appointment/ confirmation on the post of teacher which he had procured on the strength of a forged marksheet/ degree of B.Ed. should not be cancelled.
(3.) Though it is asserted in para 8 of the writ petition that the petitioner submitted a reply to the above notice but neither a copy of any such explanation/reply nor its acknowledgement has been placed on record of the writ petition on the pretext of unavailability. The respondents in their reply have denied receiving any such explanation/reply. As no explanation was offered by the petitioner to the show cause notice, the District Education Officer acting in furtherance of a formal communication forwarded by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Chittorgarh terminated the services of all three candidates including the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 05.07.1992.;