Punjab and Haryana High Court: In a writ petition for quashing of the show cause notice issued to the petitioners-candidates regarding the production of forged medical certificates and the debarment order whereby the petitioners were debarred for three years, a Single Judge Bench of Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J., disposed of the petition, holding that the candidates violated law and sought preferential treatment against the competing candidates by not only seeking a scribe but also claiming extra time to write in the exam on the basis of documents which were prima facie forged. Additionally, the Court directed a probe into such cases of forgery and the issuance of the certificates produced by the candidates.
Background
The candidates produced medical certificates regarding physical limitations for the purpose of appearing in a selection exam conducted by the respondent authority. Based on these certificates they were provided with compensatory time and facility of a scribe to write the exam.
Eventually, on verification, the respondent authority was informed by the offices of Chief Medical Officer-cum-Civil Surgeon in Jind, Haryana and Fatehpur, Uttar Pradesh that the certificates were not issued by them.
Thus, the candidates were found guilty of misconduct as the medical certificates were forged and they were not even residents of those districts. Accordingly, they were debarred for a period of three years. Communication regarding the debarment orders was also sent to the concerned Superintendent of Police (‘SP’), for taking respective action, however, no action was taken.
Analysis and Decision
The Court noted that the respondent authority was not required to send a communication to the SP concerned, where the petitioners reside, however, the criminal proceedings for submission of forged/fabricated documents could have been initiated within the local territorial jurisdiction as well.
The Court stated that despite the medical officers submitting a report denying the issuance of the medical certificates, the candidates displayed an audacity to append yet another set of fabricated documents purportedly denying the verification report and claiming that the same was wrong. When the Court confronted them that an investigation would be conducted into the second set of documents, they sought to withdraw the present writ petition.
Noting the aforesaid, the Court stated that despite the candidatesbeing conscious that the documents were forged, they not only attempted to defeat the rights of other contesting candidates by placing reliance upon forged certificates but also showed an audacity to emphatically rely upon forged certificates for claiming a right and portraying victimization. The Court held that prima facie, the candidates were violators of law and sought preferential treatment against the competing candidates by not only seeking a scribe but also claiming extra time to write in the exam on the basis of documents that were prima facie forged. The Court remarked that the mere striking co-incidence that all the petitioners, belonging to a particular district, secured the medical certificates from another district/State itself was sufficient to raise a doubt.
The Court further remarked that the tendency of candidates to take recourse to illegal methods like forgery of certificates for seeking different benefits, including the benefit of reservation, sports gradation, disability, etc., was on a leaping increase. The candidates have been emboldened to take recourse to forged documents for securing public appointment by a belief that under any eventuality, no harsh action shall be taken against them in case they feel sorry or withdraw their petition.
The Court stated that such behaviour which promoted disregard for rule of law and motivated a candidate to resort to forgery of documents to defeat the rights of other genuine candidates had to be dealt with sternly.
Accordingly, the Court directed the respondent authority to report all such cases of forgery to the Senior SP, Chandigarh, who was further directed to take appropriate steps in accordance with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Additionally, since some of the certificates were allegedly produced by the office of Civil Surgeon, Jind, Haryana, the Court directed the State Vigilance Bureau, Haryana, to conduct an inquiry into the issuance of those certificates and submit a report before the Court.
Thus, the Senior SP as well as the State Vigilance Bureau were directed to submit their respective reports before the Court within three months.
[Sahil v. Staff Selection Commission, North-Western Region, CWP No. 5700 of 2025 (O&M), decided on 11-03-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the petitioner: Sukesh Kumar Jindal and Vriti Gujral
For the respondents: Senior Panel Counsel Indresh Goel and DAG Tanisha Peshawaria