The High Court dismissed an appeal filed with a condonation of delay prayer for over six years due to alleged fraud by an advocate. On merits, the court found no case to interfere with the cancellation of the appellant's appointment for producing a forged secondary examination mark-sheet.
None. The appeal is dismissed on grounds of delay and lack of merit.
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.
[2024:RJ-JD:1314-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 744/2023
Kalu Lal Rao S/o Shri Banshi Lal Rao, Aged About 44 Years, B/c Dholi, Resident Of Rao House, Kulmiyon Ka Choraha, Vallabh Nagar, Udaipur 313601 (Rajasthan)
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. M.S. Godara For Respondent(s) : ----
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
Order
09/01/2024
[2024:RJ-JD:1314-DB]
[SAW-744/2023]
(2 of 3)
impugned order. It is also stated in the aforesaid application that Mr. Mehta asked him that the appeal against the impugned order has already been filed and, thereafter, in the year 2018, the appellant was again called by Mr. Mehta to sign some documents, which he has signed. It is stated in the application that on enquiring, Mr. Mehta informed the appellant that on account of COVID-19 Pandemic, his case could not be decided and the same will be decided immediately after the Pandemic is over.
Later on, the appellant was in receipt of a letter from Mr. P.C. Singhvi, Advocate on 29.05.2023, in which, it is mentioned that Mr. Mehta has expired on 10.04.2022 and the original papers belonging to the appellant are found in his office and the same are to be returned to the appellant. On receiving this letter, the appellant immediately contacted his counsel and preferred this appeal without any delay.
Having gone through the averments made in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, we are not convinced that the appellant has satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the present appeal. It is unbelievable that after 2018, upto the receipt of the letter from another advocate on 29.05.2023, he did not try to enquire about his case.
Be that as it may, on merits also, we do not find any case.
The appellant was provided appointment on the post of Driver with the respondent - Mining Department. At the time of his joining, he produced mark-sheet of secondary examination issued by the Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan, Ajmer. When the respondent-Mining Department sent the said mark-sheet for verification, the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan Ajmer
[2024:RJ-JD:1314-DB]
[SAW-744/2023]
has declared that the said mark-sheet is forged one. Thereafter, a notice was issued to the appellant by the respondent-Mining Department, however, they found that the reply filed on behalf of the appellant in response to the said notice is not satisfactory. The respondent-Mining Department, while concluding that the secondary examination mark-sheet produced by the appellant is forged one, has dismissed the petitioner from services.
The learned Single Judge, while partly allowing the writ petition, has converted the said dismissal of the petitioner into cancellation of appointment only.
In such circumstances, we do not find any case for interference. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.
(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
40-nitin/divya/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of over six years in filing the appeal can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act?
Whether the High Court should interfere with the conversion of dismissal of services into cancellation of appointment?
If the facts confirmed forgery of educational marks, whether the cancellation of appointment was warranted?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kalu Lal Rao
State Of Rajasthan
Vijay Bishnoi
Rajendra Prakash Soni
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
