Trivial suppression of petty criminal conviction (Rs.100 fine) in attestation form by compassionate probationer does not justify automatic termination; employer must assess suitability impact proportionally, not invoke temporary rules for regular probationers.

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:

“i) Quash the impugned order dated 21.12.2022 passed by respondent no.2 (Joint Commissioner (P&V) CGST & CEX Commissionerate) whereby the services of the applicant stood terminated w.e.f. the date of expiry of a period of one month, from the date on which the notice is served on the applicant and the order dated 20.01.2023 issued by respondent no.2 (Joint Commissioner (P&V) CGST & CEX Commissionerate) whereby the services of the applicant were terminated w.e.f. 22.01.2023.”

2. The brief facts of this case are the applicant joined the department on 23.04.2021 on compassionate ground as Tax Assistant in the office of CGST & Central Excise Commissionerate, Kanpur in pursuance of the offer of provisional appointment letter issued by the Joint Commissioner (Cadre Control) in the office of Chief Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Zone Lucknow. During the verification proceedings, the applicant was served with a declaration/attestation form requiring him to furnish requisite details which was submitted by the applicant on 29.07.2021. In the aforesaid declaration/attestation form, the applicant at Sl.No.2 which pertains to arrest/prosecution/detain/bound down/fine by the court of law/conviction by court of law/barred from examination by any university, has furnished his reply as “NO” in respect of all the points mentioned therein. On 27.08.2021, a report was submitted to the department by the Sub-Inspector, Thana Kotwali Sadar, Unnao that in Crime No.871/16 a case was registered against the applicant u/s 13 of the Public Gambling Act 1867 wherein a chargesheet dated 29.10.2016 was filed by the police before the Hon’ble C.J.M. Court Unnao which vide its order dated 09.12.2017 fined the applicant. On 24.08.2022, the applicant was served with a notice to submit his explanation. THe applicant submitted his reply to the above notice in October, 2022. The applicant was served with the notice of termination of service dated 21.12.2022 in form 1 issued under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rule 1965. The applicant submitted his reply to the above notice of termination on 03.01.2023. On 20.01.2023, respondent no.2 served the order terminating the services of the applicant w.e.f. 22.01.2023.

3. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the orders dated 21.12.2022 and 20.01.2023 passed by respondent no.2 are illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice. Before passing the said orders, the applicant was not given any opportunity of personal hearing. He states that respondent no.2 while passing the orders under challenge did not even care to mention about the notice dated 04.08.2022 and its reply by the applicant in the month of October 2022. It is further mentioned that the applicant was fined Rs.100 in a case u/s 13 of the Public Gambling Act 1867 which is trivial in nature and would not render the applicant unfit for the post in question. The authority while passing the orders in there discretion could have ignored such suppression of fact or false information by condoning the lapse. He argues that the applicant was appointed on compassionate ground by respondent no.2 on the death of his father who dies in harness and the applicant’s termination from service would put to suffering his entire family as well as adversely affecting his career.

5. Submission of