SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Del) 299

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ANIL KSHETARPAL, AMIT MAHAJAN, JJ.
 
Comptroller And Auditor General Of India & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
Manoj Kumar - Respondent 
W.P.(C) 7831 of 2024 and CM APPL. 32435 of 2024
Decided On : 03-02-2026
 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Dr. S. S. Hooda, Mr. Shaurya Banshtu and Mr. Manpreet Singh, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anil Nauriya, Mr. Prakhar Gupta and Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Advs.

The submission of false medical certificates by a government employee constitutes serious misconduct justifying dismissal from service under the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 - Misconduct - Dismissal from service of a government employee for prolonged unauthorized absence and submission of false medical certificates - Dismissal deemed appropriate given the gravity of misconduct involving dishonesty and lack of integrity. (Paras 1, 31, 46)

(B) Judicial Review - The scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings is limited and does not extend to reappraising evidence; the courts will not interfere with the disciplinary authority's conclusion unless it is perverse or based on no evidence. (Paras 28, 30, 44)

(C) Misconduct in Public Service - The statute provides that presenting forged documents is serious misconduct which undermines trust and justifies dismissal. (Paras 40, 45)

Facts of the case:
The Respondent, after being absent without authorization for almost three years, submitted medical certificates purportedly issued by a doctor who was not in service at the time of issuance. The inquiry found these certificates to be false.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the Respondent's conduct constituted gross misconduct and reaffirmed the dismissal from service as appropriate given the circumstances of deceit and violation of service rules.

Issues: The primary issues were whether the Respondent's unauthorized absence and the submission of false medical certificates amounted to misconduct sufficient for dismissal and whether the judicial review by the Central Administrative Tribunal was appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the Tribunal erred in its assessment of misconduct and the standard of proof required for disciplinary actions, thus restoring the dismissal order made by the disciplinary authority.

Result: Writ petition allowed, order of the Central Administrative Tribunal set aside.

Table of Content
1. background of the writ petition and employment history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. details of misconduct and resultant disciplinary actions. (Para 7 , 8 , 11 , 12)
3. judicial review limited to procedural fairness. (Para 10 , 30 , 41)
4. standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings. (Para 29 , 34 , 36)
5. restoration of disciplinary penalty upheld. (Para 48 , 49 , 50)

JUDGMENT :

AMIT MAHAJAN, J.

1. The present writ petition has been field under Article 226 /227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the Order dated 29.05.2023, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘CAT’) in O.A. No. 1489 of 2015, vide which the orders/charge-memos dated 11.05.2006 and 05.03.2007 were quashed with directions to the Petitioners to reconsider the matter and impose a lesser penalty than “dismissal from service” against the Respondent/ Charged Official - Sh. Manoj Kumar.

2. In the present case, the Petitioner No. 1 is the head of the Indian Audit and Accounts Department, the Petitioner No. 2 is an independent authority/Office under the aegis of the Petitioner No. 1 and the Respondent is a former employee of the Petitioner No. 1.

3. Succinctly stated, the quintessential facets governing the present dispute are that the Respondent had joined service as a Peon on 27.11.1991 and was promoted to the post of Daftry on 01.01.1998 and to the post of Clerk on 03.01.2000.

4. Undisputedly, he was absent without authorization from 04.09.2000 to 29.04.2003, i.e., for a continuous period of nearly three years, without obtaining prior sanction of leave. According to the Respondent, he was suffering from Tuberculosis during this period.

5. Upon joining back service on 30.04.2003, the Respondent submitted Medical Certificate dated 29.04.2003 and Fitness Certificate dated 30.04.2003 purportedly issued by one Dr. T.P. Singh, then CMO, CGHS, Sunder Vihar.

6. Correspondence was thereafter exchanged between the Petitioners and the Central Government Health Scheme (‘CGHS’) authorities seeking verification of the medical and fitness certificates submitted by the Respondent. Vide communication dated 08.02.2006, the Additional Director (HQ), CGHS informed the Petitioners that no such certificates had been issued from the CGHS dispensaries concerned.

7. On 11.05.2006, a charge memorandum was issued to the Respondent alleging submission of false/fabricated certificates. In Reply, the Respondent vide his letter dated 05.06.2006, not only denied the article of charge but also submitted that the medical certificate dated 29.04.2003 and fitness certificate dated 30.04.2003 issued to him by Dr. T.P. Singh were genuine as the doctor had never refused/denied this fact. The Respondent further submitted that Dr. T.P. Singh was still the CMO, CGHS Dispensary, Sunder Vihar, New Delhi and the doctor had again certified on 03.06.2006 that the certificates in question were issued by him.

8. Since, certain additional facts were placed on record which required verification, the above chargesheet was withdrawn. A fresh Chargesheet dated 05.03.2007 was issued against the Respondent alleging giving false statements that Dr. T.P. Singh is still a sitting CMO, CGHS and submission of false/fabricated medical/fitness certificates in connivance with the said doctor, amounting to misconduct under Rule 3(1)(i) and 3(1)(iii) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. The Article of charges are as under: -

“Statement of article of charge framed against Shri Manoj Kumar, Clerk

Article

Shri Manoj Kumar, Clerk absented himself from duty w.e.f. 4.9.2000 to 29.4.2003 unauthorisedly Shri Manoj Kumar joined duty on 30.4.2003 and submitted medical certificate dated 29.4.2003 and fitness certificate dated 30.4.2003 alleged to have been issued by Dr. (Captain) T.P. Singh, CMO, CGHS Dispensary, Sunder Vihar, New Delhi in support of his leave for the period from 5.1.2001 to 29.4.2003 on the ground of self-illness. Subsequently it revealed that the medic

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top