- (1.) Petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 14.7.2003 passed by the Appellate Authority, has approached this Court. The brief fact of the case as has been pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that, the petitioner has been appointed as Constable on 9.5.1990 and thereafter he has discharging his duty. On a complaint made by some other persons regarding the caste of the petitioner, enquiry has been conducted by issuing a memorandum of charge wherein the charge has been framed that the petitioner has submitted false and fabricated document of Garari Caste while he belongs to Yadav community, it has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that since the petitioner has been appointed in the year 9.5.1990, but dismissed from service after rendering 14 years of service, so lenient view may be taken by the department.
(2.) On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that petitioner's appointment was not fit to be continued because of the conduct of the petitioner. Since petitioner has submitted a caste certificate which was not his original caste hence it has been submitted by him that petitioner has submitted forged document on the date of consideration of his appointment, hence he does not warrant any sympathy considering the conduct of the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the authorities after appreciating evidences and the caste certificate of the petitioner has taken view of dismissing the petitioner from service for which a regular proceeding has been initiated. Petitioner has been provided full opportunity of hearing and as such the said order needs no interference.
(3.) Heard the parties.;