The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ petition challenging the termination of a driver in the General Reserve Force. The petitioner argued he should have been given notice under CCS rules but failed to disclose that he was an accused in a criminal case at the time of appointment, a fact revealed by police verification.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY ,THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
PETITIONER/S:
AJITH A.S. AGED 29 YEARS GENERAL RESERVE ENGINEER FORCE SERVICE (GS) -189266-N DRIVER MOTOR TRANSPORT ORDINARY GRADE(DVR-MT(O), RESIDING AT ASHOK LAND, KOONAYIL PARAVOOR P.O., NEDUNGOLAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691334
BY ADVS. SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SMT.SABINA JAYAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, B WING, 4TH FLOOR, SEEMASADAK BHAWAN, NEW DELHI - 110011.
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
-2-
BY ADVS. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, CGC
SMT.O.M.SHALINA, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
-3-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was enrolled as a Driver Motor Transport Ordinary Grade in the General Reserve Force ('GREF' for short) with effect from 10.07.2008. Prior to the declaration of the petitioner's probation, he received Ext.P1 communication dated 22.4.2010, as per which the petitioner was informed that his service has been terminated by the appointing authority. The challenge in the writ petition is based on Rule 5(a) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, on the ground that the Rule mandates issuance of a prior notice before termination. It is submitted in the writ petition that subsequent to the receipt of Ext.P1 order of termination, the petitioner came to understand that the reason for his termination was the fact that he was an accused in C.C.No.79 of 2009 pending before the Judicial First Class
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
-4-
Magistrate Court, Paravoor, which fact had not been stated by the petitioner while submitting his application for appointment. The fact that the petitioner was an accused in a criminal case came to light only on verification conducted by the respondents, after the petitioner had joined
the service. The petitioner contends that he was acquitted in the criminal case as per judgment dated 10.12.2010 in C.C.No.79 of 2009, produced by the respondents as Ext.R1(i). It is the further contention of the petitioner that though, after his acquittal, he submitted request for reinstatement in service, that was rejected by Ext.P2.
2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been categorically stated with the support of relevant exhibits that having suppressed the fact of being an accused in
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
a criminal case while submitting his application, the petitioner is not entitled for any prior notice and the relevant provisions mandate that his service be terminated summarily. In support of the said contention, the respondents have produced Ext.R1(a) attestation form and R1(b) appointment letter, in which there is a specific warning meted out to the candidate that if, subsequent to the appointment, the fact that false information has been furnished or that there has been suppression of any factual information in the attestation form comes to notice at any time during the service of a person, his service will be terminated. Ext. R1(h), which is the extract of GREF Record of Instructions, stipulate that the case of GREF
personnel who are adversely reported upon by the civil authorities will be dealt with in
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
-6-
accordance with instructions/procedure contained in Record in office letter No.0008/555/AR-1 dated
11 Dec 67 and Deptt of pers & AR OM No.18011/1 (5)/75-Estt (B) dated Aug 75 circulated under HQ DGBR letter No.67245/DGBR/EG2 dated 05 Nov 75. The instruction further mandate that the personnel discharged from service due to adverse police verification, in no circumstances, be informed of his having been adversely reported by civil authority.
3. In the light of the mandatory
provisions, coupled with the fact that the petitioner had deliberately omitted to bring to the notice of the authorities the fact that he was an accused in a criminal case, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief, let alone the
relief of reinstatement in service. The fact that the petitioner was subsequently acquitted of
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
the criminal case, will not be of any aid to the petitioner for the reason that as on the date on which the decision leading to Ext.P1 was taken, he was an accused in a criminal case.
In the light of the facts and circumstances narrated above, as also the provisions governing the issue, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and it is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
-8-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/4/2010 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13/2/2012 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT R1 | A TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 10/7/2008 |
ATTESTATION FORM |
|---|---|---|
| EXHIBIT R1 | B TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 10/7/2008 |
APPOINTMENT ORDER |
| EXHIBIT R1 | C TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 10/7/2008 |
FORM OF ACCEPTANCE |
| EXHIBIT R1 | D TRUE COPY OF THE ROLL. |
FRESH VERIFICATION |
| EXHIBIT R1 | E TRUE COPY OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF 10/11/2009 |
LETTER ISSUED BY THE POLICE, KOLLAM DATED |
| EXHIBIT R1 | F TRUE COPY OF THE 25/1/2010 ALONG W VERIFICATION OF C |
LETTER DATED ITH THE REMARKS ON HARACTER. |
| EXHIBIT R1 | G TRUE COPY OF SANC OF SERVICE OF THE WITH LETTER DATED |
TION FOR TERMINATION PETITIONER ALONG 22/4/2010 |
| EXHIBIT R1 | H TRUE COPY OF THE RECORD OFFICE INS |
EXTRACT OF GREF TRUCTIONS. |
| EXHIBIT R1 | I TRUE COPY OF THE |
JUDGMENT PASSED BY |
WP(C).No. 6776 of 2012
-9-
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARVOOR IN CC NO.79/2009 DATED 10/12/2010 EXHIBIT R1 J TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED APRIL, 2011. EXHIBIT R1 K TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 8/11/2011 EXHIBIT R1 L TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24/9/2011 EXHIBIT R1 M TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13/1/2012. EXHIBIT R1 N TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13/2/2012.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a government servant is entitled to notice proceedings for termination of services when he suppresses the fact that he was an accused in a criminal case at the time of appointment.
Whether subsequent acquittal in the criminal case warrants reinstatement in services after termination based on suppression of facts.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
AJITH A.S.
UNION OF INDIA
ARUN V.G.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
