Simplified Explanation of the Judgment
In February 2021, the Patna High Court dismissed the petition of a teacher who had been terminated from service for allegedly using a forged certificate to secure his appointment as an Urdu teacher.
The petitioner had been appointed as a Panchayat Teacher (Untrained) in Urdu in 2010 under the 2008 Bihar Niyojan Rules. He submitted a Molvi certificate issued in 2005 by Jamia Rahmania Hamdia, Pokhraira (Sharif), Sitamarhi. He worked in a middle school in Vaishali district for nearly a decade.
In 2019, he received a show cause notice stating that his Molvi certificate was forged, since the issuing institution was not recognized by the Bihar Madarsa Education Board. An FIR was also lodged. The petitioner replied to the notice, but his services were terminated on 29.11.2019 by the Block Education Authority.
The petitioner argued before the High Court that:
- His case was governed by the 2008 Rules, not the 2012 Rules.
- Under the 2008 Rules, there was no requirement that the Molvi certificate must be from an institution recognized by the Bihar Madarsa Education Board.
- Therefore, his termination was illegal.
The State opposed, submitting that:
- The institution was never recognized by the Board.
- As such, the certificate had no validity from the very beginning.
- The petitioner had secured appointment on the strength of a document issued by an unauthorized institution, which amounted to fraud.
The Court examined the record and held that:
- It was not in dispute that the petitioner’s certificate, obtained in 2005, came from an institution that was not recognized at the relevant time.
- A certificate from an unrecognized institute could not confer eligibility.
- Consequently, the appointment itself was vitiated, and the termination order was valid.
The Court concluded that there was no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it.
Significance or Implication of the Judgment
This judgment underscores that appointments secured on the basis of invalid or unrecognized qualifications cannot be protected in law. Even if a teacher has worked for several years, if the foundation of the appointment (the qualification certificate) is invalid, the service is liable to be terminated.
For the government, it reinforces the principle that recognition of educational institutions is mandatory, and only certificates issued by recognized institutions carry legal weight.
For aspiring candidates, it serves as a reminder that using unrecognized or forged certificates is not only career-threatening but may also attract criminal proceedings, as in this case where an FIR was registered.
The decision also highlights the judiciary’s reluctance to interfere where fraud or forgery is alleged in the recruitment process.
Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision with Reasoning
- Was the petitioner’s Molvi certificate valid for appointment as an Urdu teacher?
❌ Decision: No. The certificate was issued by an unrecognized institution and was therefore invalid. - Was the termination order dated 29.11.2019 illegal?
❌ Decision: No. Since the certificate had no validity, the termination was justified. - Does long service of nearly 10 years protect the petitioner?
❌ Decision: No. Fraud vitiates everything. An invalid certificate cannot create legal rights, regardless of service length.
Case Title
Petitioner v. State of Bihar & Ors.
Case Number
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7422 of 2020
Citation(s)
2021(1) PLJR 787
Coram and Names of Judges
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy
(Oral Judgment dated 09.02.2021)
Names of Advocates and Who They Appeared For
- For the Petitioner: Mr. Piyush Kumar, Advocate
- For the Respondents (State): Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, SC-13
Link to Judgment
https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjNzQyMiMyMDIwIzEjTg==-WdJVu8B8ymY=
If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar, you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.
