Submission of a fraudulent certificate for employment eligibility renders the initial appointment void ab initio and may result in disciplinary action, including compulsory retirement.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order passed by the 2nd respondent in O.A.No.754/2013 dated 06.09.2013, quash the same.)

S. Vaidyanathan, J.

1. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the 1st respondent who has admittedly submitted a fake/ false certificate as belonging to Scheduled Caste (SC) Community, though the 1st respondent admittedly belonged to Back ward Class (BC) and thereby enjoying relaxation by 5 years of the upper age limit in terms of the advertisement calling for applications for appointment as Trainee in Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (hereinafter referred to as "BARC") under the In-plant Training Programme vitiates and renders entire process of appointment as void.

2. In 1986, BARC issued an advertisement inviting applications for in In-plant Training, the 1st respondent submitted his application indicating his caste as "Adi Dravidar" and submitted a certificate bearing number CA 13257/84 A2 dated 30.07.1986 issued by Special Duty Tahsildar (Certificate) Saidapet. The attestation form dated 08.04.1987 submitted by the 1st respondent consequent to his selection had indicated "Adi Dravidar" against the column regarding caste.

3. It may be relevant to note that the advertisement calling for applications to the post of Trainee in BARC prescribed that the age limit of the applicant should not be less than 18 years and not more than 20 years as on 01.07.1986. However, an exception was made to Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe candidates and upper age limit was relaxed by 5 years. The date of birth of the 1st respondent is 24.04.1962. Thus, in terms of the age limit prescribed therein, the 1st respondent may not be eligible for appointment. But, for the relaxation by 5 years in the case of SC/ST candidates, inasmuch as the 1st respondent was 24 years old on the date of application to the post.

4. The 1st respondent upon successful completion of the training programme was appointed as Tradesman/C in BARC, Mumbai with effect from 31.03.1989, thereafter he was promoted to the post of Tradesman/D and was transferred on his own request to Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research Centre, Kalpakkam (hereinafter referred to as "IGCAR") and joined on 12.10.1992. Upon further promotion under the merit promotion scheme was promoted as Scientific Assistant/D. While so, on the basis of the complaint lodged by the General Secretary, SC/ST Association of Department of Atomic Energy (hereinafter referred to as "DAE") against the 1st respondent vide FIR No.343/2012 on 21.10.2012 under Sections 420, 468, 471 of IPC on the charge of gaining Government Employment by submitting fake certificate. The 1st respondent was initially arrested and was placed under deemed suspension. Thereafter, was released on bail on 02.11.2012 and the suspension was revoked.

5. On verification by the Competent Authority, it was found by the District Vigilance Committee (Community Certificate Verification), Kancheepuram that the 1st respondent belongs to Hindu Thuluva Vellalar, which is listed as Backward Community (BC). Consequently, a charge memo was issued on the premise that the 1st respondent has while applying for the post of Stipendiary Trainee in BARC, Trombay, Mumbai submitted a fake community certificate claiming that he belongs to Schedule Caste (SC) Community and secured Central Government Employment reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate availing relaxation of age under the order on reservation.

6. The 1st respondent submitted his explanation to the charge memo wherein he had admitted that he belonged to Backward Class (BC) Community and not Schedule Caste/ Schedule Tribe (SC/ST). Subsequently, a representation was submitted by the 1st respondent dated 31.05.2013 by seeking to defer the departmental action till the final disposal of Criminal Case which was rejected to by the petitioner against which an Orig