Ashokkumar TT v. Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

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 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 comiected 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 The Writ Petitions were dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to challenge the order dated 15.11.2010 passed by the Regional Transport Authority,Agra.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. Ml'. Arun Bhardwaj, the learned counsel for the petitioners, on instiuctions,does not wish to follow thetrodden path ofseeking 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 notin possession offake licenses as in factthe official who had issued the receipt had issued a receipt ofRs.600/- collectively for ten peisons instead oftaking an individual license fee at the rate of Rs.60/- Anothei contentionraised by the learned counselfor the petitioner isthatthe license could betemied as"fake"only whentheauthoritysaysthatthey 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 W.I.(C)No.4320/2015,4321/2015,4336/2015,4337/2015,4348/2015 Page 4 of[7] licenses as fake are thatthe address ofthe petitioners wasincomplete 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 forthe petitioners..

6. These petitioners were seeking appointment to the post of Fire Operators in the DPS. To seek appointment to the said post, it was pre requisite for these petitioners to have a FMV driving licence. As per these ^ petitioners, they had obtained their driving licences from the Regional i S V Transport Officer, Agra and when verification ofthese licenses was earned out by the Office ofthe 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 ofTransport Authority, Agra but ^ A -V; ?. Tiansport 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 oftheiremployee,namely SitaRam Verma.A FIR wasregistered against him and he was arrested and also placed under suspension. Before terminating the temporaiy services of all these petitioners, a Show Cause Notice was seiwed upon them and it,is an admitted case between the parties thatthese petitioners neverraised any challengetothe said decisiontakenby the Transport.Authority oftenning their licences as forged. It was already stated above thatit waspre-requisite forthese petitionersto bein possession of IIMV diiving 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 sensitivejob and itis pertinentthatonly the ablest ofdrivers make their way into the services ofthe DFS and get appointed as FireT)perators. Itwasforthepetitionersto havetakenstepsto challengethe decision ofthe Transport Authority, Agra before the Competent Court of law and having taken no steps in this regard even after they were made awaie ofthe said decision,by itselfspeaks volumes ofthe conduct ofthese W.P.(C)No.4320/2015,4321/2015,4336/2015,4337/2015,4348/201; Page[6] of[7] ¥ 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. lo a queiy 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 Courtthat criminal cases have been registered against all these drivers. jT

8. Mi\ Arun Bhardwaj disputes this fact. However,ifthis is not coiTect, and no criminal cases have been registered against these drivers, then we diiect the Police Station to investigate the role of the holders of these licenses and alter investigation proceed in accordance with law.

9. There is no merit in the present Writ Petitions and the same are hereby dismissed.