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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 823

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Akhil Kumar Srivastava, J, Mallika Arya, AM
Yashwant Singh Shayalwar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Defence – Respondent
Original Application No. 219 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellant: Shri Vijay Tripathi
For the Respondents: Shri S.P.Singh

Suppression of material information in employment applications justifies dismissal from service due to grave misconduct.

Headnote:(A) Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 - Rule 14 - Dismissal from service - The applicant challenged the dismissal from service on grounds of suppression of material facts in the attestation form and providing false information regarding criminal proceedings - The inquiry report found such allegations proved, leading to the imposition of penalty - The court upheld the dismissal on grounds of grave misconduct. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 15, 16)

(B) Employment Law - Requirements for honesty in declarations - The court underscored that any suppression or misrepresentation of material facts in the recruitment process could lead to termination, as this undermines trust essential for employment. (Paras 12, 14)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was dismissed from service after being found to have suppressed critical information regarding ongoing criminal proceedings at the time of filling the attestation form required for employment. (Para 3)

Findings of Court:
The court found the actions of the applicant in suppressing information as grave misconduct justifying the dismissal. The court affirmed that the dismissal was warranted under the existing rules considering the nature of the positions within the government. (Paras 15, 16)

Issues: The primary issue addressed was whether suppression of material information in an attestation form warranted termination, and whether the applicant's reasons for such suppression were justifiable. (Para 5)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant's suppression of critical information during the hiring process constituted grounds for dismissal, emphasizing that such actions severely undermine the trust required in government service, thus affirming the disciplinary actions taken against him. (Paras 15, 16)

Result: The Original Application is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. importance of honesty in employment applications (Para 1 , 5 , 15)
2. case background and misconduct details (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6)
3. legal precedents on employee misconduct (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 14)
4. court's emphasis on trust in employee declarations (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
5. conclusion on dismissal validity (Para 16)

ORDER

By Mallika Arya, AM.-

By way of filing the present Original Application the applicant has challenged the order dated 06.07.2023 (Annexure A/1) whereby a penalty of ‘dismissal from service which shall ordinarily be a disqualification for future employment under the Government’ was imposed against him. The applicant has also challenged the order dated 16.11.2023 (Annexure A-2) whereby the appeal of the applicant has been rejected by the appellate authority. He has further challenged the charge-sheet dated 01.06.2022 (Annexure A-3).

2. The applicant in the present Original Application has sought for the following relief-

"8.2 Set aside the impugned orders dated 06.07.2023 Annexure A/1, 16.11.2023 Annexure A/2 and charge-sheet dated 01.06.2022 Annexure A/3 with all consequential benefits"

3. Briefly the case of the applicant is that the applicant was initially appointed as Casual Labour in the Pay & Accounts Office (ORS), Corps of Signal, Jabalpur on 01.04.1997. The service of the applicant was terminated by the department w.e.f. 01.02.2001 without assigning any reason. Feeling aggrieved with termination order, he filed an Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal Jabalpur. Thereafter, he filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court. In pursuance to the order of the Hon'ble High Court, Jabalpur dated 10.09.2003, he was reinstated/appointed against Group-D post by order dated 28.12.2005, after qualifying the examination and was appointed as LDC by order dated 19.03.2012. When the applicant was working on daily wages in the department, his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) lodged an FIR against him and his entire family under section 498- A/34 of the IPC in the police Station Ranjhi. It is relevant to mention here that he has never been sent to Jail. He has been exonerated by the competent court on 28.10.2014. Applicant has performed more than 25 years of service in the department. A memorandum of charges dated 01.06.2022 (Annexure A/3) was issued to the applicant in which it was alleged that he had suppressed factual information and furnished false information in the attestation form. At the time of appointment against Group-D post he was provided an attestation form which was required to be submitted by him after furnishing all relevant information. Since, the applicant was not a well-qualified person and was not able to fill up the attestation form, he went to the District Court, Jabalpur and took assistance from a clerk of an advocate, who filled the attestation form of the applicant. Since, the applicant was not aware about the legal technicalities therefore, he took assistance of clerk of the advocate. He had no intention to suppress any information from the Department. It has happened due to lack of knowledge, lack of qualification and lack of awareness. After receiving the memorandum of charges, the applicant denied all the charges in toto vide written statement of defence dated 10.06.2022. Thereafter, Inquiring Officer and Presenting Officer were appointed by order dated 12.07.2022 (Annexure A/4) and disciplinary inquiry was conducted. After conclusion of the disciplinary proceeding, the inquiry officer submitted his inquiry report dated 19.01.2023 (Annexure A/5) which has been communicated to the applicant vide letter dated 09.02.2023 received on 21.02.2023 wherein he has found the Articles of charge proved against the applicant. After receiving a copy of the inquiry report, the applicant preferred representations dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure A/6) & 11.04.2023 (Annexure A/7) before the disciplinary authority. The Disciplinary Authority passed an order dated 06.07.2023 (Annexure

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