Back
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
Vikash – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, C.J.
The Petitioner, Vikash hails from a village in Sonbhadra (Uttar Pradesh), and he is a matriculant. His family appears to be engaged in a small farm in his native village. Like any village youth, he was quite ambitious to enter public service. He applied for the post of Constable (Washerman) in the service of Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB), an armed force of the Union Government. This application was in the year 2020. At that time, he was only twenty-one (21) years old. He was selected in the vacancy of Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category. The appointment order shows that the appointment was purely temporary but likely to continue. His probation was for a period of two (02) years from the date of appointment. He was offered an appointment in the State of Sikkim. Accordingly, he reported and joined duty as a Constable (Washerman) at 36th Bn SSB, Geyzing on 05.03.2024.
[2] The Petitioner approached this Court, challenging the order passed by the official Respondent on 17.08.2024 terminating his service. He had been terminated with effect from 17.08.2024 for the reason that he had suppressed involvement in two crimes while submitting declaration in th
Non-disclosure of trivial criminal offenses may not justify termination in public employment, considering the nature of the position and socioeconomic background of the candidate.
Non-disclosure of a past minor criminal case does not automatically justify termination of employment; each case must be evaluated on its specific facts and circumstances.
Probationary employees may be terminated for violating appointment terms, including misrepresenting criminal history, without requiring formal procedural safeguards.
Non-disclosure of a pending criminal case in employment applications must be evaluated against the nature of the charges and the context of acquittal, impacting the candidate's suitability for servic....
An employee who suppresses material information or gives false information cannot claim a right to continue in service.
A candidate's non-disclosure of a past acquitted criminal case does not automatically justify disqualification from public service; each case must be assessed on its merits and surrounding context.
The cancellation of a candidate's selection based solely on the registration of a criminal case, without evidence of complicity, is unjustified and reflects a lack of proper consideration of the fact....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
