The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging orders canceling the petitioner's appointment. The court held that the experience certificate was forged and that the petitioner could not raise a new factual ground regarding her independent merit. Equity did not favor restitution of benefits based on fraud.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (S) No. 3470 OF 2016
Smt. Manjeeta Vishwakarma W/o Vijay Kumar Vishwakarma, aged about 32 Years R/o Village Kusmusi, Tahsil Bhaiyathan District Surajpur Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Dy. Advocate General
Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
Order on Board
08/08/2016
Heard on admission.
2
submitted by the petitioner. He further submits that according to the petitioner, it is the outcome of conspiracy hatched by respondent No. 5 seeking cancellation to her appointment. Next submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Collector himself found that the petitioner has not submitted any false/forged certificate along with the application. The appointment of the petitioner was not liable to be cancelled and it is contended that whatever has been paid to the petitioner could not be recovered from the petitioner as it would amount to severe hardship. Last submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that according to the petitioner even if those six marks are not awarded to the petitioner towards experience, the petitioner would be selected for the said post.
3
of fact that certificate of experience which was found in the record of selection and on the basis of which, six marks awarded to the petitioner was forged and false document because there is no Gram Panchayat named as Askheratola in existence.
(Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge
Tiwari
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a false experience certificate obtained by fraud entitles the employee to claim of cumulative benefits granted on the basis of such fraudulent document under Article 226.
Whether a new factual ground regarding merit independent of the fraudulent experience can be raised for the first time in writ proceedings when certiorari jurisdiction is sought.
Whether the finding that the document was forged and false is unassailable in absence of contradictory evidence from the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Manjeeta Vishwakarma W/o Vijay Kumar Vishwakarma
State of Chhattisgarh
The Commissioner, Surguja Division
The Collector Surajpur
The Project Officer, Unified Child Development Project
Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bhaiyathan
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
