13 Nov 2021 11:32 AM GMT
The Supreme Court reiterated that in the event of any suppression or on submitting false information, it is always open for the employer to cancel the candidature or terminate service of the employee/candidate.In the year 1994, the appellant in this case was selected and appointed as Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police Service. His services were terminated on the ground that that he was a deserter...
The Supreme Court reiterated that in the event of any suppression or on submitting false information, it is always open for the employer to cancel the candidature or terminate service of the employee/candidate.
In the year 1994, the appellant in this case was selected and appointed as Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police Service. His services were terminated on the ground that that he was a deserter from the Army. It was noted that he had not disclosed about his earlier employment in Army and suppressed the said information.
The contention raised by the appellant was that the employer ought to have conducted inquiry by giving opportunity before his termination. On the other hand, the employer contended that, as the order impugned is a termination simpliciter, there was no need to conduct an inquiry, as much as, the service of the appellant was not confirmed.
The bench comprising Justices R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy noted that the order that it is only a termination simplicitor without any allegation against the appellant.
"During the period of probation, it is always open to the employer to verify the antecedents of a temporary appointee, in case any information is received by way of complaint or otherwise. Merely because the antecedents were verified by addressing a letter to the SHO/ Inderpuri, it cannot be said that respondents have conducted regular inquiry, so as to give an opportunity to the appellant.", the court observed.
The bench then referred to the following observations made in the judgment in Avtar Singh vs. Union of India (2016) 8 SCC 471:
"32. No doubt about it that once verification form requires certain information to be furnished, declarant is duty-bound to furnish it correctly and any suppression of material facts or submitting false information, may by itself lead to termination of his services or cancellation of candidature in an appropriate case. However, in a criminal case incumbent has not been acquitted and case is pending trial, employer may well be justified in not appointing such an incumbent or in terminating the services as conviction ultimately may render him unsuitable for job and employer is not supposed to wait till outcome of criminal case. In such a case non-disclosure or submitting false information would assume significance and that by itself may be ground for employer to cancel candidature or to terminate services."
Therefore, his appeal was dismissed.
Case name and Citation: Rajesh Kumar vs Union of India LL 2021 SC 644
Case no. and Date: CA 7353-7354 OF 2009 | 11 November 2021
Coram: Justices R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy
Counsel: Adv Anshu Mahajan for appellant, ASG Jayant Sud for Centre
Click here to Read/Download Order