Delhi High Court
Vijesh Kumar vs Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Nct Of ... on 1 May, 2015
$~26, 27, 29, 30, 31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of hearing and order: 01.05.2015
+ W.P.(C) 4320/2015
VIJESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv.
versus
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
..... Respondents
Through Ms. Anjana Gosain, Mr. Arjun Pant,
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Ms. Sonia
Arora, Adv.
+ W.P.(C) 4321/2015
MANOJ KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv.
versus
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
..... Respondents
Through Ms. Anjana Gosain, Mr. Arjun Pant,
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Ms. Sonia
Arora, Adv.
+ W.P.(C) 4336/2015
NAVEEN KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv.
versus
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
..... Respondents
Through Ms. Anjana Gosain, Mr. Arjun Pant,
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Ms. Sonia
Arora, Adv.
W.P. (C) No. 4320/2015, 4321/2015, 4336/2015, 4337/2015, 4348/2015 Page 1 of 7
+ W.P.(C) 4337/2015
ASHOK KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv.
versus
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
..... Respondents
Through Ms. Anjana Gosain, Mr. Arjun Pant,
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Ms. Sonia
Arora, Adv.
+ W.P.(C) 4348/2015
DINESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv.
versus
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
..... Respondents
Through Ms. Anjana Gosain, Mr. Arjun Pant,
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Ms. Sonia
Arora, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
ORDER
%
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. (ORAL)
CM No. 7833/2015 in WP(C) No.4320/2015
CM No. 7834/2015 in WP(C) No.4321/2015
CM No. 7853/2015 in WP(C) No.4336/2015
CM No. 7854/2015 in WP(C) No.4337/2015
CM No. 7870/2015 in WP(C) No.4348/2015
Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.
Applications stand disposed of.
WP(C) No.4320/2015
WP(C) No.4321/2015
WP(C) No.4336/2015
WP(C) No.4337/2015
WP(C) No.4348/2015
1. By a common order dated 07.07.2014, the learned Central
Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred
to as the 'learned Tribunal') has dismissed a batch of Original Applications
(in short 'OA') preferred by the applicants who were selected to be
appointed to the post of Fire Operators in Delhi Fire Service (in short
'DFS') but their services were terminated under Sub- rule (1) of Rule 5 of
the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 (in short 'CCS
Rules') after their driving licences were found to be forged on verification
from the Licensing Authority.
2. By this order, we propose to dispose of the present batch of Writ
Petitions preferred by the petitioners who were the applicants before the
learned Tribunal and are aggrieved by the common order dated 07.07.2014
passed by the learned Tribunal. The said common order was also challenged
by some other petitioners before this Court and by order dated 21.04.2015
passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 6358/2014 with other connected Writ
Petitions and order dated 30.04.2015 in W.P.(C) 3633/2015 with other
connected Writ Petitions. The Writ Petitions were dismissed as withdrawn
with the liberty to challenge the order dated 15.11.2010 passed by the
Regional Transport Authority, Agra.
3. Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, the learned counsel for the petitioners, on
instructions, does not wish to follow the trodden path of seeking withdrawal
of the present Writ Petitions with the same liberty as was granted to the
other petitioners. The learned counsel emphatically submits that the
petitioners have a very good case on its merits.
4. Addressing arguments, the learned counsel submits that the
petitioners were not in possession of fake licenses as in fact the official who
had issued the receipt had issued a receipt of Rs.600/- collectively for ten
persons instead of taking an individual license fee at the rate of Rs.60/- .
Another contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the
license could be termed as "fake" only when the authority says that they had
not issued the license. The learned counsel further contends that the two
grounds which have been given by the licensing authority to term the said
licenses as "fake" are that the address of the petitioners was incomplete and
that individual receipts were not given, which at best could have been
termed as a violation of the procedure envisaged in 9(2) of the Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988 and in any case the same could not have been termed as
"fake". The learned counsel further submits that the Transport Authority
was not a party before the Ld. Tribunal and therefore also no credence could
be given to the stand taken by the respondents.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. These petitioners were seeking appointment to the post of Fire
Operators in the DFS. To seek appointment to the said post, it was pre-
requisite for these petitioners to have a HMV driving licence. As per these
petitioners, they had obtained their driving licences from the Regional
Transport Officer, Agra and when verification of these licenses was carried
out by the Office of the Regional Transport Officer, Agra, vide order letter
dated 15.11.2010 they reported that all the 81 driving licences which were
issued in favour of all these candidates seeking appointment to the post of
Fire Operator were fake and forged. Prior to this, there were some
contradictory reports given by the Office of Transport Authority, Agra but
finally after deeper and closure examination, the Office of the Regional
Transport Officer, Agra found all these driving licences to be forged. The
Transport Authority could also unearth the main man behind this fraud who
being one of their employee, namely Sita Ram Verma. A FIR was registered
against him and he was arrested and also placed under suspension. Before
terminating the temporary services of all these petitioners, a Show Cause
Notice was served upon them and it is an admitted case between the parties
that these petitioners never raised any challenge to the said decision taken by
the Transport Authority of terming their licences as forged. It was already
stated above that it was pre-requisite for these petitioners to be in possession
of HMV driving licences and there could be no compromise on this
condition, as these petitioners after their appointment were to operate the
Fire Brigade vehicles and any compromise in this regard could prove
disastrous. It was imperative for these petitioners to possess proper driving
licenses. Theirs is a very sensitive job and it is pertinent that only the ablest
of drivers make their way into the services of the DFS and get appointed as
Fire Operators. It was for the petitioners to have taken steps to challenge the
decision of the Transport Authority, Agra before the Competent Court of
law and having taken no steps in this regard even after they were made
aware of the said decision, by itself speaks volumes of the conduct of these
petitioners. We cannot be oblivious of the fact that the Agra Transport
Authority, Agra has already identified the main man behind this whole
murky affair, i.e. one Sita Ram Verma against whom a criminal case was
registered and he was arrested and placed under suspension.
7. To a query raised by the Court to the learned counsel for the
respondents as to whether criminal cases have also been registered against
all the holders of the said forged licences, the learned counsel apprises the
Court that criminal cases have been registered against all these drivers.
8. Mr. Arun Bhardwaj disputes this fact. However, if this is not correct,
and no criminal cases have been registered against these drivers, then we
direct the Police Station to investigate the role of the holders of these
licenses and after investigation proceed in accordance with law.
9. There is no merit in the present Writ Petitions and the same are
hereby dismissed.
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J
I.S.MEHTA, J
MAY 01, 2015/aj/v
