Case Note & Summary
This case involved an appeal against the termination of a constable's appointment due to alleged misrepresentation in an affidavit submitted during recruitment. The appellant applied for the constable position following an advertisement by the State Government of U.P. and submitted an affidavit stating no criminal cases were registered against him. However, a report revealed a prior criminal case against him, which had resulted in his acquittal. The Senior Superintendent of Police cancelled his selection, citing the affidavit's inaccuracies. The appellant challenged this decision in the Allahabad High Court, which upheld the termination based on a precedent case. The appellant argued that his acquittal should negate the relevance of the prior case in the affidavit. The court analyzed the Government Order regarding character verification and concluded that the appointing authority did not properly evaluate the appellant's suitability for the position. The court distinguished the precedent case cited by the respondents, noting that the circumstances were materially different. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, reinstated the appellant, and quashed the termination order, although it denied back wages for the period out of service.
Headnote
A) Employment Law - Misrepresentation in Affidavit - Justification for Termination - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The appellant's termination was based on alleged misrepresentation regarding a criminal case, despite his acquittal. The court found that the appointing authority failed to assess the appellant's suitability for the post, leading to an unjust termination. Held that the appellant's selection should not have been cancelled based solely on the affidavit (Paras 8-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant's termination from service due to alleged misrepresentation in the affidavit was justified.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the High Court, and quashed the termination order. The appellant was to be reinstated within two months without back wages.
Law Points
- Affidavit misrepresentation
- suitability for appointment
- character verification
- acquittal impact
- government service appointment criteria
