Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of ALMs With Fake or Unrecognised ITI Certificates; Distinguishes Between Forged Documents and Mere Irregularities

Case Name: Sunil Kumar & Connected Matters vs. DHBVN & Others
Date of Judgment: 29 November 2025
Citation: CWP-18580-2016 and connected petitions
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the termination of several Assistant Linemen (ALMs) appointed in DHBVN after finding that many of them had secured employment on the basis of forged ITI certificates, while others relied on certificates issued by an unrecognised institute (NITI, Rewari). The Court held that appointments obtained by fraud are void from inception, and no equity or sympathy can override the foundational illegality. For petitioners who merely studied at an unrecognised institute but did not commit fraud, the Court held that non-recognition goes to the root of eligibility and still disentitles them from continuing in service.

Summary: The petitioners were appointed as ALMs under Advertisement No. 4 of 2008, which required a valid ITI qualification in Electrician/Wireman trade or two-year vocational training in Lineman trade. Several petitioners were later suspended and dismissed after verification revealed that:

• Some possessed forged or fabricated certificates from NITI, Rewari.
• Others had certificates from NITI, Rewari, an institute which the Haryana Industrial Training Directorate confirmed was not recognised for issuing such qualifications.
• Some had already served for years and had even been promoted, but the underlying certificate issue surfaced only after departmental verification.

The Court conducted an extensive analysis of fraud jurisprudence, citing Ram Chandra Singh, Prohlad Guha, and Jainendra Singh, reaffirming that fraud vitiates even the most solemn administrative acts and that no estoppel can operate in favour of an employee who secured appointment dishonestly. It held that long years of service or satisfactory performance cannot cure the original illegality.

For petitioners whose certificates were not forged but merely issued by an unrecognised institution, the Court relied on Ram Bhagat Sharma and Bidhi Chand, holding that lack of recognition is a substantive disqualification, especially in technical posts where competence is directly tied to safety and public utility systems. Experience cannot substitute statutory qualification.

Decision: The High Court dismissed all writ petitions, upholding DHBVN’s orders of dismissal. It ruled that employees who entered service on the strength of forged certificates had no right to continue and could not claim procedural protections that presuppose a valid appointment. For those with certificates from an unrecognised institute, the Court held that the absence of mandatory qualification made them ineligible from the outset, and the employer was entitled to rectify the error upon discovery. The Court concluded that no relief—equitable or otherwise—could be granted in the face of foundational illegality.