SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY, M.R. SHAH, JJ.
Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank and Another – Appellants
Versus
Anit Kumar Das – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 3602 of 2020, SLP (C) No. 8343 of 2020
Decided On : 03-11-2020
Suppression of Material Fact - Eligibility Criteria for Recruitment - Circular Letter No. 25 of 2008 dated 06.11.2008, Circular Letter No. 6 of 2016 dated 04.3.2016 - The court held that the respondent-original writ petitioner deliberately, wilfully and intentionally suppressed the fact that he was a graduate, and the High Court erred in directing the appellant Bank to allow the respondent-original writ petitioner to discharge his duties as a Peon. The eligibility criteria/educational qualification mentioned in the advertisement was as per Circular Letter No. 25 of 2008 dated 06.11.2008, and a conscious decision was taken by the bank providing eligibility criteria/educational qualification that a graduate candidate shall not be eligible for the post of Peon/subordinate staff. The High Court's decision was unsustainable and was quashed and set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant Bank invited applications for the post of Peon with specific eligibility criteria that a candidate should have passed 12th class or its equivalent with basic reading/writing knowledge of English and should not be a graduate as on 01.01.2016. The respondent, though a graduate, applied for the post without disclosing his qualification. Upon discovery of his graduation, his candidature was cancelled, and he was not allowed to join the bank.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent deliberately suppressed the fact of being a graduate and was not eligible as per the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement. The High Court erred in directing the appellant Bank to allow the respondent to discharge his duties as a Peon.
Issues: The main issue was whether the High Court was justified in directing the appellant Bank to allow the respondent to discharge his duties as a Peon despite his deliberate suppression of being a graduate and his ineligibility as per the eligibility criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondent's deliberate suppression of being a graduate and his subsequent ineligibility as per the eligibility criteria justified the cancellation of his candidature. The High Court's decision was unsustainable and was quashed and set aside.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order of the High Court directing the appellant Bank to allow the respondent to discharge his duties as a Peon was quashed and set aside.
JUDGMENT :
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Leave granted.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 22.11.2019 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Appeal No. 278 of 2019 by which the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant herein and has confirmed the judgment and order dated 13.03.2019 passed by the learned single Judge of the High Court in W.P. (C) No. 19261 of 2016, by which the learned single Judge allowed the said writ petition preferred by the respondent herein and directed the appellant Bank to allow the respondent herein-original writ petitioner to discharge his duties as a Peon as per the appointment order dated 03.10.2016, the employer-Punjab National Bank has preferred the present appeal.
2. Applications were invited by the appellant Bank for the post of Peon by publishing an advertisement in the local newspaper. The eligibility criteria mentioned in the said advertisement was that a candidate should have passed 12th class or its equivalent with basic reading/writing knowledge of English. It specifically provided that a candidate should not be a Graduate as on 01.01.2016. A candidate was also required to submit the bio-data as per the prescribed format. The respondent herein, though a Graduate, applied for the said post. However, neither in the application nor in the bio-data, he disclosed that he was a graduate. At this stage, it required to be noted that the eligibility criteria and the educational qualification prescribed above was as per the Circular Letter No. 25 of 2008 dated 06.11.2008 issued by the Human Resources Development Division (for short “HRD Division”) of the Bank specifying the guidelines for recruitment of staff in subordinate cadre in the bank and prescribing the eligibility criteria. That on the basis of the information provided by the applicants in their applications, a list of eligible candidates was prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in 10th Class and 12th Class. As per Circular dated 04.03.2016 issued by the HRD Division of the Bank, the selection of the peons was required to be made on the basis of the percentage of marks obtained by the candidates in 10th standard and 12th standard. That so far as the respondent herein-original writ petitioner is concerned, based on the information provided by him in his application, his name appeared in the selected candidates of Balsar District. That an order of appointment was issued. It appears that while scrutiny of the documents was going on, the appellant Bank came to know about a graduate certificate showing that the respondent-original writ petitioner was a graduate since 2014. Thus, it was noticed and found that he was not eligible as per the advertisement and the Circulars and that the respondent deliberately, wilfully and intentionally suppressed the fact that he was a graduate. Therefore, his candidature was cancelled and he was not allowed to join the bank in subordinate cadre. That, thereafter, the respondent filed the writ petition before the High Court, being Writ Petition (C) No. 19261 of 2016, for an appropriate order to allow him to discharge his duties as Peon as per the appointment order dated 03.10.2016 and to further direct that his appointment may not be cancelled on the ground that he has possessed higher qualification. That the said petition was opposed by the bank by filing a detailed affidavit-in-reply. It was specifically pointed out that the eligibility criteria and the educational qualification was fixed as per the Circular Letter No. 25 of 2008 dated 06.11.2008 issued by the HRD Division of the Bank. It was also pointed out that on 04.03.2016 the HRD Division issued another Circular Letter No. 6 of 2016 pursuant to the decision of the Bank’s Board in their meeting dated 29.02.2016, by which it was decided that the selection of the Peons will be made on the basis of the percentage of marks obtained by the candidates
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.