In Era Of Cut-Throat Competition, Candidate Obtaining Employment Through Fake Marksheets Can't Claim Equity: Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan High Court has rejected the petition filed against order of the Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. (“Respondent”) wherein petitioner's appointment was cancelled, on the grounds that the MBA degree based on which the appointment was obtained was fraudulent and false.The bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta further rejected the prayer of the petitioner to regularize his appointment based on subsequent degree, opining that the degree of MBA was a prerequisite for the recruitment, thus the appointment based on mark-sheets issued by a fake/unrecognized and fraudulent institution was illegal. The Court further ruled that in an era of cut-throat competition, no equity could be claimed by a candidate who produced fake mark-sheets for his degree. The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the petitioner against his termination of services by the respondent. It was the case of the petitioner that he had done MBA from the Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management University, Sikkim (“the University”) in between 2010-2012. In 2013, he appeared for the examination for the post of Junior Accountant and succeeded. During document verification, he produced the mark-sheets of MBA, and for the degree, he submitted an undertaking for submitting the same within a few months. Based on this undertaking, he was given the appointment. But when he tried to obtain the degree, he found that the University had been closed with a FIR being lodged against it. Since the entire record was with the CBI, the petitioner could not obtain the degree. Petitioner argued that it was for valid reasons that he could not obtain the degree for which his employment should not have been cancelled, especially when the mark-sheets were produced.The petitioner further argued that even otherwise, he had now completed MBA from some different university and based on that respondent should be directed to ratify the order. On the contrary, the counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner produced fake mark-sheets and also failed to produce a degree as per the undertaking. It was highlighted by the counsel that in the undertaking it was said that the petitioner had done MBA in 2013, however, the marksheets were produced for the academic years 2010-11 and 2011-12. Furthermore, the counsel also submitted that they failed to get the credentials of the petitioner verified by the University. It was argued that the University and the mark-sheets issued by it were bogus and could not be given credence to. The counsel also submitted that it could not be believed that the petitioner graduated in Arts in 1999, and did MBA in 2012 after 13 years. Hence, he was argued to be guilty of producing forged/ fraudulent documents to get the appointment. After hearing the contention, the Court firstly opined that since the petitioner had failed to adhere to the undertaking submitted by him, and consequently failed to meet one of the appointment conditions, the petition was liable to be dismissed. Furthermore, the Court observed that the degree was either bought or procured by the petitioner from some fraudster but not earned or acquired. Furthermore, the Petitioner not only produced fake mark-sheets but also tried to mislead the Court by doing the same. The Court pointed out multiple discrepancies in the evidence submitted by the petitioner, including the fee receipts, mark-sheets, oral evidence, etc., and ruled that the petitioner was an Arts graduate and had no formal study of accounting. Furthermore, petitioner's plea of considering his latest MBA was also rejected by the Court on the grounds that MBA was a prerequisite for getting the appointment. It was held that, “If the petitioner's mark-sheets given by the EIILM University is held invalid or ignored, then, obviously at the time of appearing in the recruitment process in the year, 2013, the petitioner did not have requisite educational qualification…in the era of cut-throat competition, a candidate who has produced fake mark-sheets cannot claim equity and pray that the degree he has obtained subsequently be considered.”Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition ruling that the petitioner had no case either on merit or in equity. Title: Sada Ram v the Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 389Click Here To Read/Download Order

In Era Of Cut-Throat Competition, Candidate Obtaining Employment Through Fake Marksheets Can't Claim Equity: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

Tags