2016 Supreme(MP) 1031
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
R.S. Jha, J.
Rajveer Shakya – Petitioner
Versus
The State of M.P. & Ors. – Respondents
W.P. No. 7286 of 2015
Decided On : 22-03-2016
For the Petitioner:Brijesh Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent:R.B.S. Tomar, Advocate.
Suppression of material information in the attestation form amounts to moral turpitude and justifies dismissal, regardless of the gravity of the offense or the acquittal.
Headnote:
Suppression of Criminal Antecedents - Compassionate Appointment - 498 (A) and 323 of the IPC - 2015(4) MPLJ 648 - The court discussed the suppression of criminal antecedents in the verification form and its consequences, citing the case of Vinod Kumar Tomar v. Union of India. The court emphasized that suppression of material information in the attestation form amounts to moral turpitude and justifies dismissal, regardless of the gravity of the offense or the acquittal. The court also highlighted the automatic termination of services in cases of suppression as per the attestation form.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground as a Peon in a government school. His appointment was cancelled due to the suppression of a criminal case and acquittal in the character verification form.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had suppressed the fact of a criminal case and acquittal in the character verification form, which justified the cancellation of his appointment.
Issues: The issues revolved around the suppression of criminal antecedents in the verification form, the consequences of such suppression, and the validity of the order cancelling the appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that suppression of material information in the attestation form amounts to moral turpitude and justifies dismissal, regardless of the gravity of the offense or the acquittal. The court also highlighted the automatic termination of services in cases of suppression as per the attestation form.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as meritless.
R.S. Jha, J.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the order dated 09.09.2015 by which the compassionate appointment of the petitioner on the post of Peon in Govt. High School Babedi, Bhind has been cancelled on account of the fact that on character verification it was found that the facts stated by the petitioner in the verification form were false and incorrect and that he had suppressed the fact that a criminal case has been filed and registered against him previously in which he had been acquitted on account of compromise and failure of the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been duly appointed on compassionate ground in place of his father who had died while in service on 25.10.2014. It is submitted that the authorities at the time of his appointment had verified all his documents and therefore, the impugned order passed on 09.09.2015 after appointment of the petitioner and due verification is per se illegal. It is further stated that the impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity to the petitioner and therefore, violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner.
3. The learned Govt. Advocate for the State in his return stated that the petitioner was granted compassionate appointment in accordance with the policy of the State in place of his father, who had died in harness. It is stated that the compassionate appointment of the petitioner was subject to police verification with the specific stipulation that in case the information given by the petitioner was found to be false, his appointment shall be cancelled. It is submitted that the petitioner on being asked had given an affidavit that no case was registered against him and had also made a similar declaration in the verification form. However, subsequently, on enquiry by the police it was found that a criminal case No. 4/2004 under Sections 498 (A) and 323 of the IPC had been instituted against the petitioner in which he was acquitted on account of compromise and failure of the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
4. It is submitted by the respondents that the verification report dated 27.06.2015 (Annexure R/1) further states that the fact of registration of aforesaid case, trial against the petitioner and his acquittal was suppressed by the petitioner in column 12 of his verification form. It is also submitted that on a bare perusal of the aforesaid police verification report and the stipulation contained in para 4 of the order of appointment of the petitioner dated 23.06.2016, the respondent authorities have passed the impugned order dated 09.09.2015 with which no fault can be found.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is observed that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground on 26.03.2015 on the post of Peon. A bare perusal of the condition No.4 of the order of appointment makes it, abundantly clear that the petitioner was well aware that his pay would be released to him only after character verification and that in case on police verification it is found that information submitted by him was found to be false or that his character was found to be doubtful, his services would come to an end automatically. A perusal of Annexure, P/4 filed by the petitioner, also indicates that the petitioner had submitted an affidavit before the authorities on 30.03.2015 to the effect that no case has ever been registered against him in the Union of India at any point of time. It is also apparent from perusal of Annexure R/1 that the police authorities on character verification found that a Criminal Case NO. 4/2002 was registered against the petitioner and in which he was acquitted on 24.12.2010 and that the information given by him in column No.12 of his character verification form was false and therefore, in view of the warning contained in para 1 of the character verification form and the note appen