Submission of forged certificates for government jobs disentitles compassionate appointment claims.

The applicant, Abhishek Ranjan Tiwari, sought compassionate appointment after the death of his father, a Chief Reservation Supervisor, on June 20, 2019, due to a brain stroke.

The applicant initially submitted an application with educational certificates including a B.Com (Accountancy) Certificate from Sridhar University, Pilani, Rajasthan.

This application was rejected on September 16, 2019, by the Assistant Personnel Officer/III, Divisional Railway Manager (Personnel), Katihar, on the ground of submission of a fake B.A. certificate from Sridhar University, Rajasthan.

The applicant's counsel argued that the B.A. certificate from Sridhar University could not be termed fake, citing a public notice dated October 20, 2020, issued by the Government of Rajasthan warning against irregularities in certain universities, including Sridhar University.

Subsequently, the applicant's mother made further representations on June 30, 2022, and September 19, 2022, requesting consideration for compassionate appointment based on matriculation and intermediate certificates, which are requisite qualifications for Class-III or Class-IV posts.

However, the Divisional Railway Manager (Personnel), Katihar, responding on December 13, 2022, stated that applications for compassionate appointment would not be considered if the case had already been rejected for submitting a fake certificate.

The Opposite Parties confirmed that verification revealed the applicant's B.Com certificate from Sridhar University, Rajasthan, was not genuine, leading to the rejection of his claim.

The Registrar of Sridhar University, Pilani, Rajasthan, informed the Opposite Parties on August 20, 2019, that the applicant was never a student and his documents were not genuine.

An investigating officer also personally visited the university and confirmed the mark sheet was fake.

The Railway Board's policy (GM(P)/MLG's letter no. 586E/81/1 (W)/Policy/Rectt. (CGA) dated September 25, 2017) advises against considering further applications if a candidate has submitted fake certificates.

Whether the rejection of the applicant's claim for compassionate appointment based on the submission of a fake B.Com certificate from Sridhar University was valid.

Whether the applicant's subsequent request for compassionate appointment based on his matriculation and intermediate certificates should be considered by the respondent authorities despite the prior rejection for submitting a fake graduation certificate.

The court applied the principle that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

It relied on the policy decision of the railway authorities, specifically GM(P)/MLG’s letter No. 586E/81/1 (W)/Policy/Rectt. (CGA) dated September 25, 2017, which advises against considering applications for compassionate ground appointment (CGA) if the candidate has previously submitted fake certificates.

The court emphasized that railway services require high levels of morality and honesty, and that intending to procure appointment on the basis of forged papers amounts to intentional fraud/cheating.

The court analyzed the facts by first establishing that the applicant indeed submitted a B.Com certificate that was subsequently found to be fake after verification by the Railway authorities.

The Registrar of Sridhar University explicitly stated that the applicant was never a student and the documents were not genuine.

An independent investigation corroborated this finding.

The court rejected the applicant's contention that the Sridhar University degree was merely "not recognized" rather than "fake," clarifying that the public notice cited by the applicant pertained to a different branch of the university and was not relevant to the specific fake certificate submitted by the applicant.

Crucially, the court applied the railway's policy articulated in GM(P)/MLG’s letter dated September 25, 2017, which mandates non-consideration of further compassionate appointment applications if a previous application was rejected due to the submission of fake certificates.

The court held that the applicant's act of submitting forged documents for compassionate appointment amounted to intentional fraud and a breach of the expected integrity required for government service.

Therefore, his subsequent requests based on genuine matric and intermediate certificates were deemed ineligible for consideration under the established policy.

The court held that the rejection of the applicant's initial application and the subsequent refusal to consider further applications based on genuine certificates were justified under the railway's policy against candidates submitting fake documents.

No relief was granted to the applicant, and all pending MAs were disposed of.