Sudhir Agarwal, J.@mdashHeard Sri Rahul Jain, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1, 2 and 3 and Sri
Ankush Tandon, who has put in appearance on behalf of respondents no. 4 and 5. Sri Pradeep Kumar, Advocate, has also assisted the Court
appearing for newly impleaded respondent no. 6.
2. The Court proceeds to decide this matter with the consent of learned counsels for parties on the basis of pleadings already on record at this
stage under the rules of the Court.
3. Writ petition is directed against the order dated 1.8.2011 (Annexure 21 to writ petition) issued by Director of Education (Secondary)
(hereinafter referred to as ""D.E. (S)"") in respect to verification of B.Ed. degree of respondents 4 and 5 and their right to claim salary. The D.E.(S)
has said that the matter has already been decided and conveyed by letter dated 15.6.2010 (Annexure 13 to writ petition) and does not require any
further reply. Petitioners have further sought a writ of certiorari for quashing order dated 31.3.2011 (Annexure 18 to writ petition) addressed to
Manager/Principal of Janta Inter College, Sonughat, Deoria (hereinafter referred to as ""College"") informing that accounts of College will be
operated by single operation under Section 3 (3) of U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other
Employees) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as ""Act, 1971"") and payment of salary to the Teachers whose B.Ed. certificates were under
process of verification i.e. respondents 4 and 5 shall be made by Finance and Accounts Officer in the Office of District Inspector of Schools,
Deoria (hereinafter referred to as ""DIOS"") until further orders.
4. Facts, giving rise to the present dispute and stated in the writ petition may be summarized as under.
5. The College is a recognised Intermediate College and governed by provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to
as ""Act 1921""), Act, 1971 and U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as ""Act, 1982). However,
Act, 1971 is applicable only to staff upto High School since the recognition of the College upto Intermediate is without any financial assistance
(foRrfoghu). Sri Babban Yadav, son of Sri Ram Chandra Yadav, respondent no. 4, was appointed as Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) on ad hoc
basis on 26.3.1991 which was duly approved by DIOS on 4.4.1991. While seeking appointment, he has submitted documents including the copy
of his B.Ed. degree claimed to be issued by Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as ""Gorakhpur
University, Gorakhpur""). Similarly respondent no. 5, Rama Shankar Yadav was also appointed as Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) on ad hoc basis
on the basis of his B.Ed. degree said to have been issued by Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur.
6. A complaint was made by one Srikant Singh on 30.12.2008 that respondents 4 and 5 have obtained their appointment on the basis of bogus
and forged degrees of B.Ed. Thereupon the Manager of College required respondents 4 and 5 to submit their explanation about genuity of
marksheet and degree of B.Ed. Vide letter dated 30.9.2008, both the respondents, namely, respondents 4 and 5 claimed that their marksheet and
degree are genuine. They filed self attested copies of marksheets which have been filed as Annexure 5 and 6 to this writ petition.
7. Respondent no. 4''s letter is Annexure 5 which says that he appeared with roll no. 20926 from Satish Chandra College, Ballia in B.Ed.
Examinaton1987 conducted by Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur and obtained 225 marks in written and 150 marks in practical. Similarly,
respondent no. 5, namely, Rama Shankar Yadav also claimed to have appeared in B.Ed. Examination1986 with roll no. 21947 from Sri Murli
Manohar Town Post Graduate College, Ballia and the examination was conducted by Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur.
8. The Joint Director of Education also required DIOS to conduct enquiry regarding genuity of B.Ed. marksheets of respondents 4 and 6 vide
letter dated 17.1.2009 pursuant whereto DIOS appointed Principal, Government Inter College, Deoria as Inquiry Officer by his order dated
30.1.2009.
9. In the meantime Management of College also made an enquiry from Gorakhpur University and the Examination Controller vide letter dated
12.10.2009 informed the Manager that marksheets of both respondents 4 and 5 is false. Before any action could be taken, the D.E.(S),
respondent no. 2, in the meantime, by letter dated 23.7.2009, referring to a complaint made by a Member of Parliament raising doubt and
suspicion on the enquiry regarding genuity of B.Ed. certificates of respondents 4 and 5, required DIOS to send entire record to Directorate so that
matter may be enquired thereat. The DIOS in furtherance thereof, vide his letter dated 4.8.2009, required the Principal of the College to send
entire record for further transmission to Directorate.
10. Principal having failed to send the record, DIOS issued another letter dated 2.9.2009 stopping payment of salary to the Principal as well as
respondents 4 and 5. In the meantime respondents 4 and 5 were also stopped, by the Principal of the College, from signing attendance register and
they were also told of non payment of salary. The respondents 4 and 5 thus approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 52430 of 2009 wherein
the Court noticing the statement of Principal of College that University has verified that certificates of B.Ed. submitted by respondents 4 and 5 are
false, and information is being transmitted to the competent authority for further action, disposed of writ petition without any further order.
11. The Principal thereafter transmitted entire record with requisite information it had received from University, to DIOS vide letter dated
20.10.2009. He also submitted a letter dated 23.10.2009 requesting DIOS to release his own salary since he has transmitted the record and
complied with DIOS''s order. Thereafter DIOS transmitted entire record to Directorate on 4.11.2009 and by order dated 17.11.2009 released
salary of Principal but not of respondents 4 and 5.
12. It is the D.E.(S) who passed an order on 10.2.2010 requiring the DIOS to pay salary to respondents 4 and 5 till genuineness of their B.Ed.
marksheets is under verification. This letter of D.E.(S) has been placed on record by Sri Pradeep Kumar, assisted by Sri Uma Nath Yadav,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 6 along with his ""Brief of Events"" which has been taken on record with the consent of
learned counsel for parties so as to have complete set of record before this Court.
13. This letter reads as under:
14. DIOS however sought necessary directions from Deputy Director of Education, Directorate, Allahabad vide letter dated 29.3.2010 about
payment of salary to Sri Babban Yadav and Sri Rama Shankar Yadav in the light of this Court''s order passed in Writ Petition No. 52430 of
2009. It is said that in reply thereto, D.E. (S) issued a letter dated 15.6.2010 (Annexure 13 to writ petition) stating that B.Ed. certificates of
concerned two Teachers, namely, Sri Babban Yadav and Rama Shanakr Yadav have been sent to ViceChancellor, Meerut University for
verification who has furnished verification letter which is appended thereto and further proceedings be taken accordingly. The writ petition does not
contain the alleged verification received from Meerut University, said to be appended with letter dated 15.6.2010. DIOS however to have sought
further guidance by letter dated 3.7.2010 whereafter D.E.(S) issued letter dated 7.7.2010 (Annexure 14 to writ petition) reiterating what it has
already said in letter dated 15.6.2010. Thereafter DIOS sent a letter dated 21.9.2010 (Annexure 15 to writ petition) addressed to
Principal/Manager of College informing that B.Ed. certificates of respondents 4 and 5 have been got verified by D.E.(S) and, therefore, payment of
salary to both these persons be ensured. Manager sent a letter dated 28.1.2011 requiring DIOS to furnish a copy of verification letter received
from the concerned University but did not receive any reply and thereafter sent another letter dated 5.3.2011 informing that both respondents 4
and 5 claimed to have passed B.Ed. from Gorakhpur University and the said University has already verified that the two certificates and
marksheets of B.Ed. submitted by respondents 4 and 5 are false, yet it is not clear as to in what circumstances D.E.(S) has made verification from
Meerut University when the said University has nothing to do with this matter and in what circumstances direction for payment of salary has been
issued. It further said that there is something seriously wrong and the matter required further enquiry.
15. Another letter along with certain documents sent by Management to DIOS on 8.3.2011. It appears that DIOS got irritated with this defiant
attitude of Management and passed order on 31.3.2011 for single operation under Section 3 (3) of Act, 1971. He directed that salary to
concerned Teachers i.e. respondents 4 and 5 shall be paid by Finance and Accounts Officer (in the Office of DIOS) until further orders. He
treated Management guilty of victimization of concerned Teachers i.e. respondents 4 and 5 and deprecated for such endeavour. Management
represented against the said order vide letter dated 8.7.2011 again informing all the facts. Realizing that involvement of Meerut University in the
matter was apparently erroneous, DIOS deferred his letter dated 31.3.2011 until further orders till the matter is further enquired from D.E.(S) and
passed order to this effect on 14.7.2011. He sent a copy of the said letter to D.E.(S) also enquiring as to in what circumstances, verification sought
from Meerut University instead of Gorakhpur University which has verified that certificates are false. It is in furtherance of DIOS'' order date
14.7.2011, D.E.(S) sent the impugned letter dated 1.8.2011 reiterating its letter dated 15.6.2010 and expressed its desire that no further enquiry
would be admissible in this matter. It is in these circumstances, the petitioners have come to this Court in the present writ petition.
16. While entertaining writ petition, on 28.9.2011 this Court passed a detailed order directing that entire record of matter shall be ""sealed"" and
produced before the Court. Learned Standing Counsel was also directed to ensure that authorities concerned shall get the entire record relating to
enquiry conducted against respondents 4 and 5 sealed and D.E.(S), respondent no. 2, was directed to file his personal affidavit to explain, how
such directions were issued by him. Petitioner was also directed to produce record/documents pertaining to respondents 4 and 5 which they
submitted at the time of appointment. The impugned order was stayed and respondents 4 and 5''s salary was also directed not to be paid salary
until next date of listing.
17. Sri Sanjay Mohan, holding office of respondent no. 2, has filed his affidavit. The basic facts have not been disputed therein. It has also filed
copy of letter dated 24.6.2009 sent by Principal, Government Inter College, Deoria, Inquiry Officer, appointed by DIOS for making enquiry
regarding genuity of B.Ed. certificates of respondents 4 and 5. The aforesaid letter dated 24.6.2009 sent by Inquiry Officer to Registrar
(Examination), Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur sought verification of marksheets and certificates of B.Ed. of respondents 4 and 5. It has also
filed copy of letter dated 13.8.2009 sent by Controller of Examination, Gorakhpur University verifying B.Ed. documents of respondents 4 and 5 as
false. It has admitted that some complaint was received by D.E.(S) regarding the aforesaid enquiry from a Member of Parliament from Salempur
constituency, District Deoria and pursuant thereto D.E.(S) decided to make enquiry at its own level. Hence, it summoned entire record from DIOS
vide letter dated 23.7.2009. It is, however, said that record which was transmitted to Directorate by DIOS had a letter dated 20.10.2009 of the
Principal of College in which respondents 4 and 5 were stated to have passed B.Ed. in 1987 from D.A.V. College, Muzaffarnagar. Copy of the
said letter has been filed as Annexure 7 to the affidavit. It is explained that Annexure 7 is a forged document which was made available by DIOS
to Directorate along with record and this fact came to be noted on 10.1.2012 when Principal of the College made it clear in subsequent enquiry
conducted by Directorate in January, 2012. The documents of respondents 4 and 5 showing their B.Ed. certificates and marksheets of Gorakhpur
University were also made available to Joint Director of Education at the time of enquiry it had conducted in Jaunary, 2012, vide Principals letter
dated 10.1.2012 (Annexure 9 to the affidavit).
18. In the meantime, Meerut University also informed by letter dated 12.1.2012 that documents sent for verification pertaining to respondents 4
and 5 are not correct and suspicious. The D.E.(S) found that it is on account of letter dated 20.10.2009 of Principal of the College (copy whereof
was made available to Director by DIOS vide his letter dated 4.11.2009) wherein B.Ed. degree of Meerut University was referred which has
caused entire confusion and it is in these circumstances, it found DIOS responsible for this fraud and misrepresentation. He thus got DIOS
suspended vide Government''s by order dated 16.1.2012, besides lodging first information report against respondents 4 and 5 at Police Station
Kotwali Sadar, Deoria.
19. A separate counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 4 and 5 claiming that they never sought appointment on the basis of B.Ed.
marksheets and certificates of Gorakhpur University. They claim to have passed B.Ed. examination from Meerut University. No document,
however, has been appended to the counter affidavit to show that they passed B.Ed. examination from Meerut University.
20. However, there is another short counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 4 who has appended a copy of statement of marks of B.Ed.
examination of 1987 claimed to have been issued by Meerut University showing roll no. of respondent no. 4 as E664022 and enrolment no.
M8600076 and name of the College as D.A.V. College, Muzaffarnagar.
21. During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5 could not dispute that respondents 4 and 5 actually have
claimed appointment along with documents of B.Ed. Examination pertaining to Gorakhpur University and not that of Meerut University. Even
otherwise their claim about Meerut University is clear false. Claim of respondents 4 and 5 that they passed B.Ed. Examination from Meerut
University also stands belied from reply which has been given by Meerut University filed as Annexure 11 to the affidavit of respondent no. 2 stating
that enrolment number and roll number of respondents 4 and 5 with which they claim to have passed B.Ed. examination from Meerut University
(D.A.V. College) were actually allotted to some other students and, therefore, the aforesaid documents are clearly suspicious and not correct. The
contents of aforesaid letter of Meerut University dated 12.1.2012 are reproduced as under:
22. The fraud and misrepresentation on the part of respondents 4 and 5 is then well established and proved. This Court finds it strange that for
such short matter such a long time was taken by respondent no. 2 and 6 in completing the enquiry and that too when the enquiry was already
conducted by Principal of College as well as Principal, G.I.C., Deoria who was appointed Inquiry Officer by DIOS. Instead of taking a
consequential appropriate action thereupon, the D.E.(S) hampered the enquiry and consequential action. Purporting to act on a complaint received
from a Member of Parliament, Salempur Constituency, District Deoria, he got the entire record transmitted to his office so that consequential
action may be deferred at the end of the Management and DIOS. This was actually deferred giving benefit to respondents 4 and 5 inasmuch
various letters and correspondence which have taken place between D.E.(S) and DIOS show that some resistance was shown by DIOS but D.E.
(S) continued to insist upon to close the matter and pay salary to respondents 4 and 4. This Court has no reason but to believe that the same must
be under some political consideration for the very reason that entire record was got transmitted to Directorate instead of allowing the Management
as well as DIOS to take consequential action in furtherance of the result of verification of B.Ed. certificates of respondents 4 and 5 from
Gorakhpur University and thereby getting the matter deferred with vague orders suggested that payment of salary to respondents 4 and 5 was the
prime objective of D.E.(S). He was more interest to restore payment of salary to respondents 4 and 5 instead of purity of system. His attempt also
appears to get the matter virtually dropped or deferred indefinitely. taking and matter virtually should be dropped or be deferred indefinitely.
23. In the counter affidavit filed by Sri Sanjay Mohan, Director (Secondary) he has not averred categorically as to how and in what circumstances,
on just a complaint received from the Member of Parliament, he called the entire record from DIOS to his own office but did not take any positive
action on the information given by Gorakhpur University. He however has tried to hold DIOS responsible for diverting the matter to Meerut
University.
24. At this stage, this Court do not intend to record its finding that entire mischief and collusion with respondents 4 and 5 involve only the D.E.(S)
or some other Officers/officials in Directorate including DIOS and political persons and leave this matter to be enquired into by an appropriate
investigating agency.
25. However, this Court has no hesitation in holding that not only appointment of respondents 4 and 5 based on fraud and misrepresentation and
bogus documents pertaining to educational qualification is void and a nullity, but payment of salary to them pursuant to such void and null
appointment is also unauthorized and wholly illegal. It amounts to defrauding public exchequer and, therefore, they should be accounted for the
entire amount.
26. Since the matter involves not only high educational authorities including D.E.(S), i.e., Sri Sanjay Mohan, who himself has filed his affidavit, the
role of the Member of Parliament, who made complaint so as to hamper the enquiry warrants investigation by Police, in my view, it is a fit case
where investigation must be conducted by a Special Task Force which would be constituted by Government. It shall be headed by some Senior
Police Officer in the cadre of Indian Police Service so that mischief of responsible persons may see the light of day at the earliest and appropriate
action may also be taken against them without any further delay.
27. In view of above, writ petition is allowed with following directions:
(i) Impugned order dated 1.8.2011 (Annexure 21 to writ petition) is hereby quashed.
(ii) The appointment of respondents 4 and 5 being a nullity, they shall not be paid any further salary.
(iii) A criminal case shall be registered against the respondents 4 and 5, the then D.E.(S) Sri Sanjay Mohan, the Member of Parliament from
Salempur Constituency (District Deoria) and others.
(iv) The criminal investigation shall be made through specially constituted investigating team i.e. Special Investigation Team headed by a senior
Police Officer in the cadre of Indian Police Service.
(v) The aforesaid investigation shall be completed within three months subject to submission of first progress report to this Court on 4.5.2012.
(vi) Subject to direction (vii) below, the respondentseducational authorities shall proceed to recover the amount, whatsoever, already paid to
respondents 4 and 5 towards salary pursuant to illegal, void and null appointments. The educational authorities shall determine the entire amount
and issue a notice within ten days from today directing respondents 4 and 5 to pay the same within one month from the date of receipt of notice
failing which such amount shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue by issuing recovery certificate.
(vii) However, it is further clarified that for the period salary has been paid to respondents 4 and 5 under orders of D.E.(S) after the same was
stopped by DIOS vide order dated 2.9.2009, the same shall be recovered from such other persons including the then D.E.(S) who are found in
collusion to have acted and cooperated in the matter enabling respondents 4 and 5 to get salary despite verification of their educational qualification
by Gorakhpur University otherwise.
(viii) Petitioner shall be entitled to cost which is quantified to Rs. 10,000/.
(ix) This case shall be listed on 4.5.2012 only for the purpose of perusal of progress report and necessary direction, if any, but for all other
purposes, it is finally decided, as above.