HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 347 of 2013 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, J. HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The present appeal is directed against the orders dated 28.02.2013 and 11.08.2009 passed in Writ-A No.33921 of 2009, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant/petitioner, challenging the order dated 25.04.2009 dispensing with his services as a class-IV employee in the institution, has been dismissed and the recall application for recalling the said order was also dismissed. 3. It appears from the record that appointment of the appellant/petitioner on 21.07.2007 on class-IV post in Dr. Karan Singh Tyagi Inter College, Rehlai, Agra, was terminated by order dated 25.04.2009 after holding an enquiry in which it transpired that educational testimonials and the transfer certificate, on the strength of which the appellant/petitioner succeeded in procuring appointment, are forged documents. 4. Indisputably, during course of hearing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge has called for the original records and after examining the same, the writ petition has been dismissed by the following order: "The original records of the Institution Scholar's Register of Sri Digambar Jain Inter College Dhuliyaganj, District Agra have been produced before this Court by the Principal of the College namely Sri Mukesh Sharma. After examination of the original records the Court finds that the petitioner has not passed class VIIIth examination and therefore the certificate enclosed by him along with his application is found to be fabricated. There is also a dispute between petitioner and Institution qua the name of Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Kiran Tiwari, Mahesh Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : P.N. Ojha Kali Charan .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And 7 Ors. .....Respondent(s) the student recorded, petitioner claims that his name is Kaurua Ram alias Kalicharan. When in the records the name mentioned is Kaurua Ram only. In view of the above this Court finds no good ground to interfere with the order impugned. No relief can be granted under Article 226 of the constitution of India. In view of the record as stands writ petition is dismissed." 5. Although, the dismissal of the writ petition was on merits but the appellant did not challenge the order dated 11.08.2009 by which the writ petition was dismissed but filed a recall application which apparently was not maintainable. The recall application was ultimately dismissed by order dated 28.02.2013 and, thereafter, the instant appeal has been filed. 6. Consequently, the office has reported a delay of 3 years 192 days in filing the appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that name of the appellant was changed from Karuaram to Kalicharan on the basis of his application. The said fact has not been considered by the learned Single Judge. In support of the said submission he seeks to rely upon the averments made in supplementary affidavit filed along with recall application. 8. The termination order dated 25.04.2009, by which the service of the appellant/petitioner was terminated specifically records that the appellant/petitioner took admission in 8th standard on 14.08.1995 and appeared in the examination during the session 1995-96 and he failed in the said examination. Thus, the pass certificate of 8th standard, on the basis of which the appellant/petitioner got appointment, was found to be a forged document. Another finding recorded in the said order is that the transfer certificate submitted by the appellant/petitioner is also a forged document. The Principal of the institution under whose signature the said transfer certificate purports to have been issued has specifically denied his signatures over the same in course of the enquiry held by the Enquiry Committee. 9. The learned Single Judge has summoned the original records and after perusing the same recorded a specific finding that the appellant/petitioner had failed in 8th standard and, therefore, the pass certificate enclosed by him was held to be a fabricated document. It is only in alternative that SPLAD No. 347 of 2013 2 learned Single Judge has also mentioned the fact that there was also dispute regarding recording of the name of appellant/petitioner in the records of the Institution and other educational certificates. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the documents submitted by the Institution are forged documents. The appellant has lodged a first information report in which charge-sheet has been submitted. 11. The said submission does not in any manner militate against the other finding recorded by the learned Single Judge after considering the original record to the effect that the appellant had not passed the 8th standard. Learned counsel for the appellant is also unable to assail the finding recorded in the order of termination that the transfer certificate, on the strength of which the appellant/petitioner allegedly got admission, does not bear the signature of the Principal. 12. Consequently, we find no substance in the submissions made. The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed. October 9, 2025 S.Prakash SPLAD No. 347 of 2013 3 (Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad