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

2023 Supreme(Guj) 513

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, JJ.
RAM KISHAN KHOIWAL – Appellant
Versus
COTTON CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED – Respondent
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1470 of 2018, Special Civil Application No. 16117 of 2016
Decided On : 27-02-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : HARSHEEL D. SHUKLA.
For the Respondent: MEHUL M. MEHTA.

Providing false information in the application form and experience certificate, in violation of the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement, can lead to termination of employment.

Headnote:

False Information - Employment Termination - Advertisement Clause 14, 23 - The court upheld the termination of employment based on the false information provided by the petitioner in the online application form, as it was found to be in violation of the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement. The court referred to relevant clauses of the advertisement and emphasized that if false or incomplete information is supplied, the candidature/appointment can be cancelled/terminated. The court also cited previous Supreme Court decisions to support its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner applied for the post of Junior Cotton Purchaser in response to a public advertisement by the respondent-Corporation. After being selected and issued an appointment letter, the petitioner's services were terminated due to alleged false information provided in the application form and experience certificate.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner had provided incorrect information in the online application form and the experience certificate, which was in violation of the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement. The court upheld the termination of the petitioner's employment based on the false information provided.

Issues: The main issue was whether the termination of the petitioner's employment based on the false information provided in the application form and experience certificate was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the relevant clauses of the advertisement, which stated that if false or incomplete information is supplied, the candidature/appointment can be cancelled/terminated. The court also cited previous Supreme Court decisions to support its decision, emphasizing that providing false information in the application form amounts to moral turpitude and can lead to termination of services.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the termination of the petitioner's employment, ruling that the learned Single Judge had not committed any error in dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.

1. The appellant-original petitioner has filed present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the impugned judgment and order dated 21.06.2018 rendered by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 16117 of 2016 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the petition filed by the original petitioner.

2. Brief facts leading to the present appeal are as under:

    2.1 It is the case of the petitioner-appellant herein that the respondent-Corporation issued public advertisement in the newspaper for the post of Assistant Manager (Marketing). Pursuant to the said advertisement, the appellant submitted online application form for the post of Junior Cotton Purchaser. It is stated that after following procedure, the appellant was selected and issued appointment letter dated 03.03.2015 to join the Corporation as a Junior Cotton Purchaser. It is stated that thereafter, respondent- Corporation issued show-cause notice dated 01.01.2016 to the petitioner-appellant herein alleging that while submitting an application form, he did not disclose correct facts and false information was supplied to the respondent-Corporation. It is stated in the show-cause notice that the certificate of experience supplied by the petitioner was false and it was not found to be in conformity with the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement. It is alleged in the show-cause notice that the petitioner has committed a serious misconduct by indulging in fraudulent means to secure employment in the Corporation and thereby, he himself has rendered liable for summary termination of services from the Corporation. The petitioner was therefore asked to send his reply/explanation. It is further the case of the petitioner that thereafter, the petitioner submitted his explanation to the respondent-Corporation in which he had pointed out the correct facts and stated that he had provided the correct information while submitting his application form and the experience certificate. It is, therefore, urged for withdrawal of the show-cause notice. It is further stated that thereafter, the respondent – Corporation passed the impugned order dated 02.03.2016 whereby the services of the petitioner came to be terminated by observing that the petitioner has furnished false experience certificate for securing employment in CCI and therefore his employment in the Corporation has become ab initio void and hence, the service of the petitioner is terminated.

2.2 The petitioner, therefore, filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority of the respondent-Corporation, however, the Appellate Authority vide order dated 18.04.2016 dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed review application which came to be rejected by the Chairman-Cum-Managing Director vide order dated 19.07.2016 and hence, the petitioner preferred the captioned petition before this Court. It is stated that the learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned judgment and order dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.

3. Heard Mr.Harsheel Shukla, learned advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr.Mehul Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the respondent.

4. Mr.Shukla, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, at the outset, has referred to the advertisement issued by the respondent-Corporation inviting application for the post of Junior Cotton Purchaser. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that as per the said advertisement, the qualification and experience for the said post were specifically stated in the advertisement itself. It is pointed out from the advertisement that the concerned candidates should provide post qualification experience of minimum one year of dealing in any Ag

            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