CWP-18580 IN TH 1. Sunil Kumar The Managin 2. Anil Kumar a Dakshin Hary 3. Bir Singh and Dakshin Hary 4. Hanuman and Dakshin Hary 5. Rohit Yadav Dakshin Hary 1 580-2016 and other connected matte IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGA umar Versus anaging Director and others umar and others in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBV gh and another in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBV an and another in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBV adav in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and othe atters NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH CWP-18580-2016 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondents CWP-20932-2016 ...Petitioners Versus HBVN) and others ...Respondents CWP-20991-2016 ...Petitioners Versus HBVN) and others ...Respondents CWP-21446-2016 ...Petitioners Versus HBVN) and others ...Respondents CWP-23390-2016 ...Petitioner Versus nd others ...Respondents r dents dents ioners dents r dents PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 6. Sandeep Kum Dakshin Hary 7. Satish Kumar State of Hary 8 Satyabir Sing The Managin 9. Manmohar S Dakshin Hary 10. Anoop Kuma Managing Di 2 580-2016 and other connected matte p Kumar in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and othe Kumar Haryana and others ir Singh anaging Director, DHBVN and others ohar Singh in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and othe Kumar ing Director, Dakshin Haryana Bijli V atters CWP-23419-2016 ...Petitioner Versus nd others ...Respondents CWP-24157-2016 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondents CWP-2642-2015 ...Petitioner Versus others ...Respondents CWP-4574-2015 ...Petitioner Versus nd others ...Respondents CWP-5145-2015 ...Petitioner Versus ijli Vitran Nigam and others ...Respondents ioner dents dents dents PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 11. Ravinder Sin Dakshin Hary 12. Sunder Singh Dakshin Hary 13. Bhupender K The Chief E others 14. Dara Singh State of Hary 15. Pawan Kuma State of Hary 3 580-2016 and other connected matte er Singh Yadav in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and othe Singh and others in Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBV nder Kumar and others hief Engineer/Admn. Haryana Vidyu Haryana and others Kumar and others Haryana and others atters CWP-5364-2017 ...Petitioner Versus nd others ...Respondents CWP-6624-2013 ...Petitioners Versus HBVN) and others ...Respondents CWP-8395-2013 ...Petitioner Versus Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited and ...Respondents CWP-8091-2018 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondents CWP-21933-2016 ...Petitioners Versus ...Respondents dents dents ioners d and dents PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 Whether only Whether full j CORAM: Present: 4 580-2016 and other connected matte only the operative part of judgment is full judgment is pronounced? HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Vaneet Soni, Advocate for t 2023, 4374-2015, 20932-2016, 2 Mr. Manoj Tanwar, Advocate fo 2016. Mr. Tarun Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Saurabh Gulia, Advocate fo 2016. Mr. Vijay Pal and Mr.Akash Lat petitioner(s) in CWP-2642-2015 8091-2018 and 11979-2023. Mr. Lokendra and Mr.Arvind K. petitioner in CWP-18580-2016. Mr. Arun Singla, AAG, Haryana Mr. Ravi Ambawata, Advocate f for the petitioner in CWP-5364 Mr. Manuj Kaushik, Advocate a for the respondent(s)-DHBVNL 2013. Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate for r CWP-5145-2015. Mr. Ashok S. Chaudhary, Advoc in CWP-2642-2015 and CWP- atters Reserved on 20.11.2025 Pronounced on: 29.11.2025 Uploaded on:29.11.2025 nt is pronounced? No Yes HARPREET SINGH BRAR te for the petitioner(s) in CWP-6624- 016, 21446-2016, 20991-2016. cate for the petitioner in CWP-21933 te for petitioner in CWP-5145-2015. ate for the petitioner in CWP-24157- sh Lather, Advocate for the 2015, 23390-2015, 23149-2016, ind K. Bangar, Advocate for the 2016. aryana. ocate for Mr.Sanjay Mittal, Advocate 5364-2017. cate and Mr. Tarsem Rana, Advocate VNL in CWP-6624-2013 and 8395- te for respondents No.1 and 3 in Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5 -4574-2015. 1933- 015. - ocate ocate - PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 HARPREET 1. mentioned ab similar questi from CWP- 2. 226/227 of th certiorari for P-6) whereby as well as proceedings a FACTUAL B 3. filling up th various othe Commission the following 4. for recruitme 5 580-2016 and other connected matte REET SINGH BRAR, J. This common order shall disp ned above as they arise from similar question of law. However, for the sak -18580-2016. The present civil writ petition 7 of the Constitution of India for issu for quashing of office order No.22 hereby the petitioner has been ordered ll as show cause notice dated 14.0 dings arising therefrom. UAL BACKGROUND The respondent-DHBVN initi up the vacancies for the post of A other posts through respondent ission vide advertisement No.4 of 200 lowing eligibility criteria- “Matric with two years ITI in having 2 years Vocational Cou conducted by Director, ITI &V from any institute recognised must have passed Hindi/Sanskri In pursuance of the said advert ruitment to the post of ALM under atters dispose of all the writ petitions imilar factual matrix and also pose a the sake of brevity, the facts are taken etition has been filed under Articles or issuance of a writ in the nature of No.228 dated 30.08.2016 (Annexure ordered to be dismissed from service, d 14.03.2016 and all consequential initiated recruitment process for t of Assistant Lineman (ALM) and dent No.4-Haryana Staff Selection of 2008. The advertisement laid down I in Electrician/Wireman trade or Course under the trade of Lineman I &Vocational Education, Haryana sed by the State Government and skrit up to Matric Standard.” advertisement, the petitioner applied under the Backward Class- B (BC-B) titions ose a taken rticles ure of exure rvice, ential s for ) and ection down e or man ana and ed B) PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 category. Upo the written te ALM vide l eligibility cr certificates in certificate of Training Inst Rewari’) for of the petition the post of Li 5. the service of the ground t certificate. A of CWP-593 23.02.2016. issued to the However, the dated 30.08.2 CONTENTI 6. is a confirme proceedings 6 580-2016 and other connected matte ry. Upon ascertaining the eligibility of tten test followed by an interview. The vide letter dated 12.05.2010 (Annex lity criteria and called upon the ates in support of his qualifications a ate of the petitioner was sent to the g Institute (Vocational Training Cent i’) for verification. The same was succ petitioner was confirmed. As a matter o of Lineman vide office order dated 3 After a lapse of about 06 years, vice of the petitioner vide order dated und that he had obtained his appoi ate. Aggrieved by the same, the petitio 5930-2016 which was dismissed a 016. A show cause notice dated 14 to the petitioner in furtherance of whic er, the petitioner was dismissed from 0.08.2016 (Annexure P-6). ENTIONS Learned counsel for the petition nfirmed employee of respondent-DH dings initiated against him have to b atters lity of the petitioner, he was called for w. Thereafter, he was appointed as an Annexure P-2) which reiterated the the petitioner to submit original tions at the time of joining. The ITI to the Principal, National Industrial g Centre), Rewari (hereinafter ‘NITI, s successfully verified and the service atter of fact, he was also promoted to ated 31.12.2014. years, respondent-DHBVN suspended dated 23.02.2016 (Annexure P-3) on appointment on the basis of a fake petitioner moved this Court by means issed as withdrawn vide order dated ted 14.03.2016 (Annexure P-4) was f which he submitted a detailed reply. d from service vide impugned order etitioner contended that the petitioner DHBVN and the any disciplinary e to be strictly in terms of DHBVN ed for as an d the iginal e ITI ustrial ‘NITI, ervice ted to ended 3) on ke means dated ) was reply. order tioner linary BVN PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 Employees ‘Regulations the procedure contravention petitioner nor proved again this ground a 7. service on th been establis documents fo upon verifica ALM. Once eligibility of spite of a l dismissed th institution an 8. Surprisingly, impeccable clarification from the H 18.12.2015. R 7 580-2016 and other connected matte yees (Punishment and Appeal) R ations of 2016’). Since dismissal from cedure laid down under Regulation 7 h ention of the same, neither any cha er nor any misconduct in terms of the against him; as such, the impugned o und alone. He further argued that the petit on the false premise that his ITI ce stablished on record. The petitione ents for scrutiny at the relevant stage erification of the same was the petit Once the concerned authority has exe lity of a candidate, it cannot retrospect f a long drawn out selection pro sed the petitioner stating that NITI ion and therefore, the certificates issue The petitioner neither misrepre ingly, after the petitioner had alr service, the XEN/Op. Division ation regarding genuineness of certif the Haryana Industrial Training 015. Relying upon the judgment ren atters al) Regulations, 2016 (hereinafter l from service is a major punishment, tion 7 has to be followed. However, in y charge-sheet was served upon the s of the Regulations of 2016 has been gned order deserves to be set aside on e petitioner has been dismissed from ITI certificate is fake, which has not titioner had submitted all relevant t stage of the selection process. Only e petitioner appointed to the post of as exercised its power to examine the rospectively declare him ineligible. In n process, the respondent-DHBVN NITI, Rewari is an unrecognised s issued by it are invalid. srepresented nor concealed any facts. ad already rendered six years of ivision, DHBVN, Dharuhera sought certificates issued by NITI, Rewari Directorate, vide memo dated nt rendered by a Division Bench of inafter ment, ver, in n the s been ide on from as not levant . Only of ne the le. In BVN nised facts. rs of ought ewari dated ch of PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 this Court in another in contended th ‘unrecognised no means of petitioner is of his promo petitioner at irreparable lo also place rel Sharma vs. S Vitran Nigam Haryana and 9. that the appo listed in the Regulation 1 Technical St appointment Electrician/W in the trade certification Industrial Tr 8 580-2016 and other connected matte urt in Home-cum-Education Secreta in CWP-2986-2015 decided on ded that there is a marked difference b gnised’ degree, especially in view of ns of knowing the nature of the insti er is a well-trained professional whic promotion to the post of Lineman. T er at such a belated stage is comple able loss to him by rendering him une ace reliance on the judgments rendere vs. State of Haryana, Bidhi Chan igam and others 2002(4) SCT 1028 and others to support their case. Per contra, learned counsel for e appointment of the petitioner was sub in the offer of appointment letter date tion 1.2 of the Recruitment and Prom cal Staff, as applicable to DHBVN, tment to the post of ALM to p cian/Wireman trade or have completed trade of Lineman. However, the ation from NITI, Rewari which is n ial Training Directorate, as intimated atters cretary and another vs. Pafna and on 28.04.2016, learned counsel rence between a ‘fake’ degree and an iew of the fact that the petitioner had e institution at the relevant time. The l which is also evident from the fact an. Terminating the services of the ompletely arbitrary and would cause m unemployed. Learned counsel have endered by this Court in Ram Bhagat hand vs. The Uttar Haryana Bijli 1028, Satnam Kaur vs. The State of el for respondent-DHBVN submitted as subject to fulfilment of conditions er dated 12.05.2010 (Annexure P-2). d Promotion Policy of Non-Gazetted BVN, requires a candidate seeking to possess an ITI certificate for pleted 02 years of Vocational course r, the petitioner has received his h is not recognised by the Haryana imated vide memo dated 29.12.2015 and unsel nd an er had e. The e fact of the cause l have agat Bijli te of mitted itions 2). zetted eking te for course d his ryana .2015 PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 (Annexure R placed the pe dated 14.03.2 letter (Annex obtained by petitioner do DHBVN. Th basis, only in the judgment Bijli Vitran 06.09.2019 ITI certificate had served th Furthermore, date of the a Hon’ble Sup Delhi and oth OBSERVAT 10. the record of suspension/te petitioner(s) continue serv 9 580-2016 and other connected matte ure R-1/1). Upon receiving this inform the petitioner under suspension and d .03.2016 upon him. Further, Para N (Annexure P-2) specifically states th d by “any institute recognised by er does not meet the eligibility cri N. The promotion to the petitioner wa nly in view of the seniority. Learned gment rendered by this Court in Aza itran Nigam Ltd. and others C 19 wherein the dismissal of petition tificate from a bogus institute, was up ved the concerned department for 07 y rmore, the applicant should possess t f the application and not subsequentl le Supreme Court in Rakesh Kumar d others 2013(4) SCT 543. RVATIONS AND ANALYSIS Having heard learned counsel fo ord of the abovementioned cases, it t sion/termination, as the case may b er(s) on discovering that they do no e serving on the post they had errone atters information, the respondent-DHBVN and duly served a show-cause notice Para No.7 of the offer of appointment ates that the certification should be by the State Govt.”As such, the ity criteria to serve the respondent ner was also granted on probationary arned counsel also places reliance on Azad Rakib vs. Dakshin Haryana rs CWP-17101-2017 decided on petitioner from service on account of was upheld in spite of the fact that he or 07 years and received a promotion. ssess the desired qualification on the quently, in terms of judgment of the mar Sharma vs. Govt. of NCT of nsel for the parties and after perusing es, it transpires that adverse action of may be, has been taken against the do not possess valid certification to erroneously been appointed to. While BVN notice tment ld be h, the ndent- ionary ce on ana on unt of hat he otion. n the of the T of rusing ion of st the ion to While PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 one set of m set relates to recognised by 11. capere potes take advantag translates to employment the delay in adverse cons employees in procedure tha an employee CWP-233390 employment becomes voi under Regula accountability upon the jud India vs. Pro State of Hary 12. rendered by 10 580-2016 and other connected matte t of matter pertains to the forged and tes to certificates that have been found ised by the Haryana Industrial Training A reference must be made the le otest de injuria sua propria which c vantage of his own wrong, and sublat tes to- when the foundation is remo ment itself has been secured by playin ay in discovery of the charade canno e consequences. Further, no protect ees in terms of Regulations of 2016 a ure that ought to be adopted in the eve ployee during the course of his serv 33390-2016, CWP-23419-2016 an ment on the basis of a forged and fab void ab initio and thus, the benef Regulation 7 cannot be made availa tability as fraud vitiates all. Relianc he judgment rendered by the Hon’bl . Prohlad Guha 2024 AIR SC 3588 Haryana in CWP-26033-2025 decid Reliance in this regard can als ed by a two-Judge bench of the Ho atters d and fabricated certificates, another found to be issued by institutions not raining Directorate. the legal maxims- nullus commodum hich can be translated to- no man can blato fundamento cadit opus which removed, the structure falls. When playing fraud on the hiring authority, cannot be used as a defence against protection can be claimed by such 2016 as these Regulations provide the he event of any misconduct on part of is service. Since the petitioner(s) in 6 and CWP-8091-2018 obtained nd fabricated certificate, their service benefit of the prescribed procedure available to them merely to escape eliance in this regard can be placed on’ble Supreme Court in Union of 3588 and this Court in Kuldeep vs. ecided on 03.09.2025. an also be placed on the judgment he Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ram nother ns not dum n can which When ority, gainst such de the art of (s) in tained ervice edure scape laced n of p vs. gment Ram PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 Chandra Sin speaking thro “15. facts a known togethe 16. Fr other p respon 17. It fraud. claim r 18. A leading believe represe therefr procee 19. In LJ Ch 20. In 11 580-2016 and other connected matte Singh vs. Savitri Devi and other g through Justice S.B.Sinha, the follo 5. Commission of fraud on court cts are the core issues involved in t own vitiates every solemn act. F gether. . Fraud is a conduct either by lette her person or authority to take a de sponse to the conduct of the former e . It is also well settled that misre ud. Indeed, innocent misrepresent aim relief against fraud. A fraudulent misrepresentation i ading a man into damage by wilful lieve and act on falsehood. It is a presentations which he knows to erefrom although the motive fro oceeded may not have been bad. . In Derry v. Peek, (1889)14 AC 337 Ch 864 : 61 LT 265 (HL). it was hel "In an `action of deceit the pla Fraud is proved when it is sho has been made knowingly, or recklessly, without caring wheth A false statement, mad without reasonable ground for evidence of fraud but does no Such a statement, if made in the not fraudulent and does not ren to an action of deceit. . In Kerr on Fraud and Mistake, at p "The true and only sound princi represented by Slim v. Crouche LJ Ch 273 : 2 LT 103 : 45 ER 46 is fraudulent not only when the false, but also when, as Jessel, have known, or must be taken to This is a sound and intelligible inconsistent with Derry v. Peek All ER Rep 1 : 58 LJ Ch 86 statement which a person ough which he must therefore be ta cannot be said to be honestly b atters others (2003) 8 SCC 319, wherein e following was opined: court and suppression of material in these matters. Fraud as is well t. Fraud and justice never dwell letter or words, which induces the a definite determinative stand as a er either by word or letter. isrepresentation itself amounts to sentation may also give reason to ion is called deceit and consists in ilfully or recklessly causing him to is a fraud in law if a party makes s to be false, and injury ensues from which the representations 337 : (1886-90) All ER Rep 1 : 58 s held: e plaintiff must prove actual fraud. shown that a false representation , or without belief in its truth, or hether it be true or false. made through carelessness and for believing it to be true, may be s not necessarily amount to fraud. n the honest belief that it is true, is t render the person making it liable , at p. 23, it is stated: rinciple to be derived from the cases ucher, (1860)1 De GF & J 518 : 29 R 462. is this: that a representation the person making it knows it to be ssel, M.R., pointed out, he ought to en to have known, that it was false. ible principle, and is, moreover, not Peek, (1889)14 AC 337 : (1886-90) 864 : 61 LT 265 (HL).. A false ught to have known was false, and e taken to have known was false, tly believed in. 'A consideration of herein erial well well the as a s to n to ts in m to akes sues ions : 58 aud. tion , or and y be aud. e, is able ases : 29 tion o be t to alse. , not 90) false and alse, n of PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 21. In 22. It w 23. Re Yadav (2003) 12 580-2016 and other connected matte the grounds of belief', said Lo important aid in ascertaining entertained. A man's mere a statement he made to be true proof that he did so.'" . In Bigelow on Fraudulent Conveya "If on the facts the average ma that is enough." . It was further opined: "This conception of fraud (and may speak of it without diffiden render the administration of the make its administration more ef upon the last matter, it will do a confusion in regard to 'moral' addition to other things, often behind such convenient and in language as 'fraud upon the law Fraud can be committed only ag and 'fraud upon the law' darken at in most cases by this obscure and fraud upon the law, is a individual's intention to commit the obvious tendency of the act i . Recently this Court by an order dav v. U.P. Board of High Scho 003)8 SCC 311 : JT 2003 Supp (1) S "Fraud is a conduct either by let other person or authority to tak as a response to the conduct of letter. Although negligence is n on fraud. (See Derry v. Peek, (18 In Lazarus Estates Ltd. v. 341: the Court of Appeal stated 'I cannot accede to th No court in this land wi advantage which he has of a court , no order of stand if it has been obta everything. The court is c is distinctly pleaded and vitiates judgments, con whatsoever;" In S.P. Chengalvaraya N SCC 1 this Court stated that f atters d Lord Herschell, 'is no doubt an ing whether the belief was really e assertion that he believed the true is not accepted as conclusive veyances, at p. 1, it is stated: e man would have intended wrong, (and since it is not the writer's, he fidence), steadily kept in view, will f the law less difficult, or rather will re effective. Further, not to enlarge do away with much of the prevalent oral' fraud, a confusion which, in ften causes lawyers to take refuge d indeed useful but often obscure e law'. What is fraud upon the law? ly against a being capable of rights, rkens counsel. What is really aimed scure contrast between moral fraud is a contrast between fraud in the mit the wrong and fraud as seen in act in question." der dated 3-9-2003 in Ram Preeti chool & Intermediate Education, (1) SC 25. held: y letter or words, which induces the take a definite determinative stand ct of the former either by words or is not fraud but it can be evidence k, (1889)14 AC 337:.) v. Beasley, (1956)1 All ER ted the law thus: o this argument for a moment. will allow a person to keep an has obtained by fraud. No judgment of a minister, can be allowed to obtained by fraud. Fraud unravels is careful not to find fraud unless it and proved; but once it is proved it contracts and all transactions ya Naidu v. Jagannath, (1994)1 hat fraud avoids all judicial acts, t an ally the sive ong, , he will will arge lent , in fuge cure aw? hts, med raud the n in reeti tion, s the tand s or ence ER ent. an ent d to vels ss it d it ions 94)1 acts, PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 24. An or con relatio Fraud 12.1. Jainendra Si has categoric who acquired Justice Fakki “31. A Divisio bestow while d the va aggrie 13 580-2016 and other connected matte ecclesiastical or temporal." An act of fraud on court is alway conspiracy with a view to depriv lation to a property would render raud and deception are synonymous Further, a three-Judge bench of ra Singh vs. State of U.P. Tr. Prinl. tegorically held that no estoppels wo cquired employment by defrauding th Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, th 1. As noted by us, all the above ivision Bench of this Court consist stowed our serious consideration ile dealing with such an issue, the C e various cardinal principles befo grieved party, namely: (i) Fraudulently obtained ord legitimately treated as voidable or could be recalled by the emp because the respondent employ a number of years, on the basis employment, cannot get any estoppel against the employer. (ii) Verification of the characte important criteria to test whe suitable to the post under the antecedents the appointing aut appoint a person to a disciplin unwarranted. (iii) When appointment was pro of forged documents, it would and fraud on the employer and equity in his favour or any e while resorting to termination w (iv) A candidate having suppres giving false information cann service and the employer, ha employment as well as other atters lways viewed seriously. A collusion eprive the rights of the others in der the transaction void ab initio. ous.”(emphasis added) nch of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in rinl. Sec. Home (2012) 8 SCC 748, els would operate in favour of those ing the employer. Speaking through ulla, the following was held: ove decisions were rendered by a nsisting of two-Judges and having ion to the issue, we consider that the Court will have to bear in mind before granting any relief to the orders of appointment could be able at the option of the employer employer and in such cases merely ployee has continued in service for basis of such fraudulently obtained any equity in his favour or any er. acter and antecedents is one of the whether the selected candidate is the State and on account of his authority if find not desirable to ciplined force can it be said to be s procured by a person on the basis ould amount to misrepresentation and, therefore, it would create no ny estoppel against the employer ion without holding any inquiry. pressed material information and/or annot claim right to continue in , having regard to the nature of her aspects, has the discretion to sion s in itio. urt in 748, those rough y a ving that ind the be oyer rely e for ined any f the e is his e to o be asis tion e no oyer d/or e in e of n to PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 13. petitioner(s) w issuing autho requisite rec factum has a Annexure R Court in Bidh be equated w vital while i service is no this Court in Singhvi, obse “18. that t Allaha should who ha Hindi The iss institut 14 580-2016 and other connected matte terminate his services. Purpo regarding involvement in any conviction is for the purp character/antecedents at the suppression of such material bearing on the character and a relation to his continuity in serv (v) The person who suppress and/or gives false information appointment or continuity in se xxx xxx Moving on, in some of the w er(s) were suspended/dismissed upon authority which happens to be NITI te recognition from Haryana Industr has also been corroborated by the D ure R-1/1, which also provides a list o Bidhi Chand (supra), has categoric ated with education, especially for jo hile in Satnam Kaur (supra) it was is not reason enough to forego the urt in Ram Bhagat Sharma (supra) i, observed as follows: We also do not find any merit in at the examinations conducted b lahabad, through the centres estab ould be treated as duly recognised b o have passed such examinations h indi Teachers in the Education depa e issue of recognition of the examin stitution has to be considered and atters urpose of calling for information any criminal case or detention or urpose of verification of the the time of recruitment and rial information will have clear nd antecedents of the candidate in service. pressed the material information ation cannot claim any right for in service. xxx xxx” the writ petitions listed above, the upon discovering that the certificate e NITI, Rewari does not possess the Industrial Training Directorate. This the Directorate as discernible from a list of similar bogus institutes. This egorically held that experience cannot for jobs where skill and expertise is it was opined that long duration of o the original requirements. Further, pra), speaking through Justice G.S. it in the argument of Shri Sangwan ed by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, stablished in the State of Haryana sed because a number of candidates ns have already been employed as department of the State of Haryana. mination conducted by a particular nd decided by the authority which tion n or the and lear te in tion for e, the ficate- ss the . This from . This annot tise is ion of rther, e G.S. wan lan, ana ates d as ana. ular hich PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 prescr this ca qualifi recogn Govern Govern draw merely been a refer t AIIMS Suprem 13.1. had gave an qualification service, to However, th Secondary E with this app observed: “24. A been in that th was in issuan 15 580-2016 and other connected matte escribes the qualifications for recru is case, it is the State Government alifications. Therefore, the deci cognise the particular qualification overnment and not by the C overnment has not taken such a aw an inference on the issue of erely because some persons possess en appointed as Hindi Teachers. In fer to the observations made by th IIMS and others v. Dr. Nikhil preme Court Cases 741 : 1996(2) S ''The two years' training a undergone by the respondent cannot be treated as a qualifica DM. Schedule I to the AIIMS R qualification or a qualificati thereto. It is not mere equivalen be recognised as equivalent. Recognised evidently means re least by the Medical Council of recognised the said research wo Cambridge University as equiva As a matter of fact, this Court in ve an opportunity to the teachers w cation from an unrecognised institution , to acquire the desired qualificati er, the Hon’ble Supreme Court i ry Education Services Commission is approach. Speaking through Justice 4. A departmental proceeding aga en initiated after the change of man at the said proceeding was initiated s initiated. Appellant, however, ha uance of or in the nature of a wri atters recruitment to a particular post. In ent which prescribes the requisite decision to recognise or not to ations has to be taken by the State e Court. Admittedly, the State a decision, therefore, we cannot e of recognition of qualifications ssessing similar qualifications have In this regard, it will be useful to by the Supreme Court in Director, hil Tandon and others, 1996(7) (2) SCT 270. g at the Cambridge University ent while working for his Ph.D. ification recognised as equivalent to S Recruitment Rules speaks of DM ication recognised as equivalent valence that is enough. It must also s recognised by the Institute or at il of India. Admittedly, neither has h work/training for two years in the uivalent to DM.” ourt in Ram Bhagat Sharma (supra) hers who had obtained the requisite titution but had completed 03 years of lification within a stipulated time. ourt in Pramod Kumar vs. U.P. ssion (2008) 7 SCC 153 disagreed Justice S.B. Sinha, the following was against the appellant might have management. We will also assume iated after the contempt proceeding r, has filed a writ application for writ of mandamus. He, therefore, In isite t to tate tate nnot ions have ul to ctor, 6(7) rsity h.D. nt to DM lent also r at has the pra) uisite ars of time. U.P. greed g was have ume ding for fore, PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 must corresp requisi right t the sai Relian Uttar P a conc agreed will be this C Article arose t relaxa require the Sel It was, sought lacked a case 27. A s before Punjab three J 28. Alm Sartaj 2006(1 16 580-2016 and other connected matte ust establish existence of a leg rresponding legal duty in the Sta quisite qualification to hold a post ght to continue. It was, therefore, im e said proceeding had been initiated liance placed by Mr. P.S. Patwalia ttar Pradesh and Others [(1990)3 S concession was made on behalf of th reed that asking the appellant therei ll be doing injustice to her. Such a is Court in exercise of its extra ticle 142 of the Constitution of Indi ose therein was as to whether the S laxation of the educational quali quired to be obtained. It was held th e Selection Committee. was, therefore, a case where relaxat ught for and granted. It was not a c cked basic educational qualification. case where the appellant lacked basi xxx xx . A similar question, on the other h fore this Court in Ravinder Sharma njab and Others, 1995(1) SCT 48 : ree Judges' Bench held : "12. The appellant was directly qualification must be either : (i) A Graduate/Intermediate sec (ii) Matric first class. Admittedly, the appellant did That being so, the appointm recommended to the Govern qualification under Regulation Government rejected that reco the appointment was clearly aga to be set aside. That being so, ever arise. We respectfully agr High Court." . Almost to the same effect is the d rtaj and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 06(1) SC 331] holding : atters legal right in himself and a State. If he did not possess the post, he could not have any legal re, immaterial as to why and when iated against him. alia on Shainda Hasan v. State of )3 SCC 48] is not apposite. Therein of the State that the University had erein to leave the job after 16 years h a view might have been taken by tra ordinary jurisdiction under India. The question, however, that he Selection Committee could grant ualification vis-a-vis the experience ld that such a power did not exist in axation in regard to experience was t a case where the appellant therein tion. Herein, we are concerned with basic educational qualification. xxx xxx er hand, came up for consideration rma (Smt.) and Another v. State of 48 : [(1995)1 SCC 138] wherein a ectly appointed. In such a case, the second class or, did not possess this qualification. intment is bad. The Commission vernment for relaxation of the ation 7 of the Regulations. The recommendation. Where, therefore, y against Regulation 7, it was liable so, no question of estoppel would agree with the view taken by the the decision of this Court in Mohd. nd Others, 2006(1) SCT 610 : [JT d a the egal hen te of rein had ears n by nder that rant ence st in was rein with tion te of in a , the tion. sion the The fore, able ould the ohd. [JT PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 29. Re Others 14. eligibility cr requirements appointment stipulated tha contained the No.1 to 3, pa “The a unders 7.1. Th produc 7.1.1. years Direct recogn added) 17 580-2016 and other connected matte "It is settled law that the qualif which the candidate possessed not at a later stage unless rule minimum qualification prescri fulfilled on the date of recruitm Moallium-e-Urdu, Jamia Urdu the year 1994 would not entail the date they were appointed. been appointed to the post of training required under Rule appointments of the appellant could not be treated to be reasons, we do not find any sub accordingly, dismissed." . Recently again in Ashok Kumar thers, 2007(2) SCT 19 : [(2007)4 SC "16. Indisputably, the appella requisite qualification as on t therefore, not eligible therefor It is the prerogative of the h lity criterion as it is best suited to ments and this Court cannot inter tment letters issued by the respond ted that the appointment shall be sub ed therein. As mentioned in the reply 3, para 7 of the offer to appointment l he above offer of appointment is be derstanding:- 1. That you actually possess the fo oduce all the original certificates in 1.1. Matric with 2 years ITI Electric ars Vocational course under the tr irector, ITI and Vocational Educatio cognized by the State Govt.” added) atters ualification should have been seen ssed on the date of recruitment and rules to that regard permit it. The escribed under Rule 8 should be ruitment. Equivalence of degree of rdu Aligarh with that of B.T.C. in tail the benefit to the appellants on ted. The appellants could not have t of Asstt. Teachers without having ule 8. That being the case, the llants were de hors the Rules and be continued. For the aforesaid substance in the appeals and are, ar Sonkar v. Union of India and 4 SCC 54], it was held : pellant herein did not hold the on the said cut-off date. He was, for."” (emphasis added) the hiring authority to lay out an ited to understand the role and its interfere with it. In the offer to espondents, it has been specifically be subject to fulfilment of conditions e reply filed on behalf of respondents tment letter reads as follows: is being made to you on the distinct he following qualification and will s in its support:- ctrician/Wireman trade or having 2 he trade of Lineman conducted by cation, Haryana from any institute (emphasis seen and The be e of . in s on have ving the and said are, and the was, ut an nd its fer to fically itions dents tinct will ng 2 d by itute PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 15. had to be ob at the time o that they do i liability by employees on Allowing suc merely becau Supreme Co Public Educ Dipak Misra “35. N the app decisio the soc regard has be withou univer the stu the law They institu say so Possib incomp possibl necess comme such tremen whethe 18 580-2016 and other connected matte There is no ambiguity that the be obtained from an institution recog time of recruitment. As such, the petit ey do in fact qualify for appointment. y by placing the entire burden to ees on the State particularly when th ng such an approach would amount because it went undetected. A two e Court in National Council for T ducation Society (2013) 1 SCC Misra made the following observations 5. Now, to the last plank of submis e appellant. It is urged by him that th cision at every stage and such delay e society was compelled to admit the gard being had to the fact that there s been laid down in many a pron thout recognition from the NCT iversity/examining body, the educa e students. An educational instituti e law. The students who take adm ey are graduates. They are expe stitution has recognition and affili y so, the institution had given admi ssibly, its functionaries harbour comparable fertile mind. The stude ssibly immersed with the idea that cessary to state that the institution mmercialize education and earn mo ch an attitude leads to a disa emendous anxiety to get a degree w hether their effort, if any, had the atters at the requisite technical qualification recognised by the State Government e petitioner(s) are expected to ensure ment. The petitioner(s) cannot escape en to weed out wrongly appointed hen they failed to exercise due care. ount to legitimising a wrongful act two-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble for Teacher Education vs. Venus CC 223, speaking through Justice vations: bmission of the learned counsel for hat the NCTE had procrastinated its delay was deliberate and, therefore, t the students and impart education, here were really no deficiencies. As pronouncement of this Court that NCTE and affiliation from the ducational institution cannot admit titution is expected to be aware of admission are not young in age. expected to enquire whether the iliation. If we allow ourselves to admission in a nonchalant manner. boured the idea that they had students who had taken admission that ignorance is a bliss. It is also tion had the anxious enthusiasm to n money forgetting the factum that disaster. The students exhibited ee without bothering for a moment the sanctity of law. Such attitudes cation nment nsure scape ointed care. ul act on’ble enus ustice l for d its fore, tion, . As that the dmit e of age. the s to ner. had sion also m to that ited ent udes PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 only b case w Scylla to be "trans the stu The in seems studen The la propou appella the sam rendered by decided on 13 16. accountable. carries with i scarce natur aspirants who it is of the ut sacrosanct, tr appreciated deserving can benefits eman by a Co-ordi vide order da “ certific 19 580-2016 and other connected matte ly bring nemesis. It would not be se which put the institution or th ylla and charybdis. On the contrar be Argus-eyed. The basic ransparency". Unfortunately, the i e students and the students, in a wa e institution decidedly exhibited ch ems that they had forgotten that the udents, while thinking "vision of e law does not countenance either opounded with anxiety, vehemence a pellant is not acceptable and, acco e same.” Reliance in this regard can als ed by this Court in Monu vs. State o on 13.11.2025. Be that as it may, the responde table. Public employment opportuni with itself the assurance of stability nature, every such opportunity as ts who pursue it with commendable d the utmost importance to ensure that t nct, transparent and free from evils o iated that hiring an ineligible cand ing candidate of the opportunity to be s emanating therefrom. The sentiments ordinate bench while issuing notice der dated 07.09.2016. The same is rep Heard. There may hardl rtificate on the basis of which em atters t be wrong to say that this is not a r the students to choose between ntrary, both of them were expected sic motto should have been the institution betrayed the trust of a way, atrophied their intelligence. d characteristics of carelessness. It t they are accountable to law. The of hope", chose to play possum. ither of the ideas. Hence, the plea ce and desperation on behalf of the accordingly we unhesitatingly repel an also be placed on the judgment te of Haryana in CWP-4559-2025 spondent-DHBVN must also be held ortunities are highly coveted as it bility and dignity. However, given its ity assumes great significance for able dedication and hope. Therefore, e that the recruitment process remains evils of arbitrariness. It must be duly candidate also means depriving a to be in service of the State and the timents of this Court were also echoed notice of motion in the present case e is reproduced below: ardly be any doubt that the trade h employment was offered to the ot a een cted been st of nce. s. It The um. plea f the epel gment 025 e held as it en its e for efore, mains e duly ing a nd the choed t case rade the PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 petitio Institu Harya service taken which about Trainin with w be gen As far Nigam implea Govern such i Harya Chief includi to initi manag the fea use ha of im withdr return only st manag commi with a litigati into th relied appoin for 6 y lapse i certific permit necess State s 20 580-2016 and other connected matte titioner by the Nigam was bogus, if stitute from where it was obtaine aryana Government. On the basis of rvices have been terminated by the i ken extreme action on discovery of ich remains is that what steps is the out reigning in these teaching shops aining Institutes spread across Ha th worthless certificates which they genuine while applying for public far as termination is concerned gam would be heard on notice issued However, at the initial s pleaded as respondent No.4 th overnment of Haryana to express th ch institutions and whether they s aryana soil only to dupe students an ief Secretary or his nominee would cluding explaining why Government initiate criminal and civil action ag anagements for cheating and practi e feasibility in reconsideration of th e has been granted to permit constru imparting education and to thdrawing such permissions and to turn the land to the rightful previous ly stern way out to stop cheating an anagements which can be stopped mmitted, as it must be, to the cause o th a view to safeguard this Cour igation. Had the Nigam in the ve to the validity of the certificate by lied upon by a candidate, this cas pointment been denied at the thresh r 6 years and then woke up to throw The Nigam, on its part, w pse in recruiting person who applied rtificate and what action has take rmitted such a recruitment to be cessary to examine the still larger ate should turn against a candidate atters s, if not a fake document, since the tained was not recognized by the is of this certificate, the petitioner's the impugned order. The Nigam has ry of the fact. But the larger issue s the Government of Haryana taking hops going by the name of National Haryana duping gullible students hey may have innocently believed to blic posts advertised by the Nigam. ed and it validity, the respondent ssued to justify action taken. ial stage the State is ordered to be 4 through the Chief Secretary, ss the views of the Government on ey should be permitted to run on ts and leave them in the lurch. The ould file an affidavit on the above ent itself should not take firm steps n against such institutions and their acticing deceit etc. and to examine of the cases where change of land nstructions to be raised in the name to consider the advisability of d to call upon their managements to ious owner/s. This appears to be the g and sharp practises resorted to by ped in Haryana by its Government use of technical education, and also ourt against wasted time in such e very beginning made an inquiry e by timely scrutiny of documents case would not have arisen, had reshold. The Nigam let time slip by row the petitioner out of job. rt, will also explain on affidavit its plied on the strength of a bogus/fake taken against erring officers who be made. For this, it would be ger issue that a Corporation of the ate and terminate his services after the the er's has ssue king al ents d to am. dent o be tary, t on on The bove teps their ine land ame of ts to the o by ent also uch uiry ents had p by it its fake who be f the after PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 utilizin balanc and the D.A.G waives of the one ad proces the Be Chief S action institut that st expect and Ni 17. regarding th misrepresente expressly sta however, do petitioner(s). proceedings, civil conseq employment 21 580-2016 and other connected matte ilizing his services for 6 years. All lanced out after receiving replies f d the one impleaded by Court. Notice of motion, returnab Notice re: stay as well. On the asking of Cou .A.G.,Haryana, accepts notice on be ives service on the State. Mr. Bhard the paper-books in the Office of A e advance copy to Mr. Rathee during Notice to the remaining ocess dasti in addition to usual mode A copy of this order be g e Bench Secretary of this Court fo ief Secretary, Haryana for his imm tion which may include blacklisting stitutions and publicizing action tak at students are forewarned not to pect to land jobs in Government ser d Nigams.” While this Court may symp ng the delay, the settled law mu resented their eligibility by failing sly stated qualifications set out in th er, does not imply the existence of er(s). In any event, mens rea dings, and the absence thereof canno consequences. Since the very fou ment stands vitiated by the use of cer atters All these issues would need to be ies from the respective respondents rnable by 18.10.2016. Court, Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. n behalf of the 5th respondent and hardwaj to supply requisite number of Advocate General Haryana with uring the course of the day. ing respondents be issued through mode. be given to Mr. Rathee attested by rt for onward transmission to the immediate attention and affirmative isting of bogus technical education taken against then in the media so t to seek admissions therein an t service and in State Corporations sympathise with the petitioner(s) w must prevail. The petitioner(s) to ensure compliance with the in their offer of appointment. This, ce of mens rea on the part of the is relevant only to criminal cannot shield the petitioner(s) from y foundation of the petitioner(s)’ of certificates issued by unrecognised o be ents Sr. and ber with ugh d by the tive tion a so and ions ner(s) ner(s) th the This, of the iminal from er(s)’ nised PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 institutions, t tainted servic desired certif would surely prospects but observation 01.08.2018, w essential req below: “ All essenti Univer appoin degree such c elsewh CONCLUSI 18. petitions are acquired the to the recrui appointment, 19. the petitione displayed by 22 580-2016 and other connected matte ions, they cannot claim entitlement to service. As far as cases pertaining t certification subsequent to their ap surely be entitled to benefits of the sa cts but the same shall not suffice to ju ation has been made by a Coord 018, with regards to the contractual em al requirements. The relevant part o All contractual appointments mad sential advertised qualifica niversities/Technical Board/Institut pointment. In cases where contrac grees/diplomas/certificates from rec ch certificates for future recruitme sewhere, a right which they would po LUSION In view of the discussion ab s are dismissed being bereft of any d the requisite qualification from a re recruitment, can avail benefit of the tment, subject to applicable rules and r However, in the matter at hand, titioner was identified 06 years pos ed by the respondent-DHBVN canno atters ent to any benefits arising from such ning to employees who obtained the eir appointment are concerned, they the same for any future employment ce to justify reappointment. A similar Coordinate bench in order dated tual employees who do not satisfy the part of the said order is reproduced made without candidates holding lifications from recognized stitutes have no case for re ntractual employees have obtained recognized institutes they may use itment in the respondent-Nigam or ld possess in any case.” ion above, all the abovementioned of any merit. The petitioner(s) who m a recognised institution subsequent of the same if they apply for fresh s and regulations. hand, the fault in the qualification of rs post his recruitment. Such laxity cannot be condoned in any shape or such ed the , they yment imilar dated fy the duced ding ized re- ined use or tioned ) who quent fresh ion of laxity ape or PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-18580 form. In Mon completed af pursuance o Commissione appropriate guidelines a employees w 20. within 03 mo order also b respondent- 21. disposed of. 22. cases. November P.C 23 580-2016 and other connected matte Monu(supra), the verification of ce ted after the petitioner therein had sp nce of an order of this Court dir issioner of Police to do the needf riate to direct the Managing Dir nes and issue instructions for veri ees within 06 months of their recruit A compliance affidavit in this re 03 months of receipt of a certified cop also be supplied to learned State co -DHBVNL for information and co Pending miscellaneous applicat ed of. Photocopy of this order be pl 29, 2025 Whether speaking/r Whether Reportable atters n of certificate-issuing institution was had spent 07 years in service, only in rt directing the concerned Deputy needful. Thus, this Court finds it g Director, DHBVN to formulate r verification of credentials of its cruitment. this regard be filed with the Registry ied copy of this order. A copy of this ate counsel and learned counsel for and compliance. pplication(s), if any, shall also stand be placed on the file of connected (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE king/reasoned. : Yes/No ortable. : Yes/No n was nly in eputy nds it ulate of its gistry of this el for stand ected RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.29 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document