The Allahabad High Court has dismissed the petition filed by Deep Maglina, an assistant teacher from Moradabad, accused of securing her appointment on the basis of a forged TET certificate. The Court held that any appointment obtained through forged documents is void ab initio and a person appointed on such basis has no right to continue in service.
The Court further clarified that although the school is a minority institution, the recruitment advertisement had explicitly required a TET qualification. Since the petitioner applied on that basis she cannot now claim exemption on the ground of minority status. Referring to her argument that “the institution in question, being a minority institution, was exempt from the requirement of possessing a TET qualification on the strength of protection under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India…………………” the Court observed that “such contention is fundamentally misconceived.”
The said order was passed by Justice Manju Rani Chauhan while rejecting the writ petition filed by Deepa Magleena.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in R. Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala, the Court reiterated that an appointment secured through a forged TET certificate is illegal from the very first moment, and no right to remain in service can arise from such fraud.
Deep Maglina was appointed in 2015 as Assistant Teacher (Hindi) at St. Joseph Girls Junior High School, Moradabad. The school was brought under the grant-in-aid system in the same year, following which it issued an advertisement and conducted a regular recruitment process. The petitioner participated in this process and secured an appointment.
In 2024, following a complaint, her TET certificate was verified. Against her claimed score of 91, the verification found she had secured only 63 marks and declared the certificate fake. In an earlier writ petition, i.e. on 20 December 2024, the High Court had set aside the order and stopped her salary and directed the authorities to issue a notice along with all relevant documents, including the Board’s report, and conclude the entire dispute within three months.
Pursuant to these directions, the Basic Education Officer sought verification from the UP Board, which on 10 February 2025, confirmed that the petitioner’s TET certificate was forged. On the basis of this report her appointment was declared void on 25 February, 2025 and the school management suspended her on 1 March, 2025.
The petitioner argued that her appointment was valid on the strength of her service since 1991, that TET was not mandatory for minority institutions and that she had never submitted a forged certificate. She also alleged malice on the part of the respondent authorities.
The Court rejected all these contentions by observing that the petitioner herself voluntarily participated in the 2015 recruitment and claimed to possess TET qualification. Her subsequent claim that TET was not required is legally untenable.
Relying further on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India v. M. Bhaskaran, the Court affirmed that, “a person who enters service by playing fraud cannot be allowed to continue even for a day, and that the consequential termination or removal is not punitive but merely a declaration that no valid appointment ever came into existence.”
The Court quoted the principle that, “if an appointment is found to be based on forgery, the authority has the right to recall the appointment. The individual appointed under such circumstances can not claim any equity or rights based on their continued service as the appointment is fundamentally flawed.”
The Court concluded that merely being a minority institution does not confer exemption from essential educational standards such as TET. Principles of long service, sympathy or parity have no application in cases involving forged documents.
Case: Deepa Magleena vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
