Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4077
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
B.K. Shrivastava, Judicial Member, Santosh Mehra, Administrative Member
Sukumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00550/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. Sreedhara
For the Respondents: K. Gajendra Vasu
A public servant who secures employment through an ineligible or non-recognized educational qualification must be removed from service. Under established service rules, once the ineligibility is proven, no penalty other than removal is permissible, and the employee cannot be retained to allow for fulfilling eligibility criteria retrospectively.
Headnote:(A) Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 - Rule 11 - Recruitment Rules - Service law - Termination of service - Production of ineligible or fake educational qualification - Validity of employment - Petitioner appointed on the basis of educational certificate issued by an institution found to be non-recognized/fake - Whether such employee can be retained in service - Government servant who fails to meet eligibility criteria or furnishes false information is liable to be removed - No other penalty permissible. (Paras 8, 9, 10)
(B) Judicial Discipline - Precedent - Coordinate benches - Requirement of institutional consistency - When an issue has been previously decided by a coordinate bench with similar facts and law, judicial propriety mandates following the earlier decision. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was appointed to a public service position based on an educational certificate. Subsequent verification revealed that the issuing board was not a recognized entity and had been dissolved. The disciplinary authority initiated proceedings, and based on the inquiry findings, the applicant was removed from service. The applicant contended that the certificate was obtained in good faith without knowledge of the board's status and requested an opportunity to obtain a valid qualification. The tribunal examined whether the applicant met the eligibility criteria specified in the employment notification and the validity of the certificate.
Findings of Court:
The documents confirmed that the educational board in question was not a recognized entity and had been dissolved by official resolution. The employment notification explicitly required qualification from a recognized board. The court found that the applicant failed to meet the eligibility requirements, and the reliance on a non-recognized document rendered the appointment invalid.
Issues: The main issues were whether the applicant met the essential educational qualifications for appointment and whether a candidate who unknowingly submits a certificate from a non-recognized board can be retained in service or allowed to rectify the deficiency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that strict adherence to eligibility criteria is mandatory for public employment. Once it is established that the educational credential is from a non-recognized or non-existent entity, the appointment cannot be sustained. Under the applicable service rules, removal from service is the prescribed consequence for the production of invalid or false information at the time of recruitment, and the tribunal cannot grant leniency or permit retention in such circumstances.
Result: Original Application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. employment termination due to submission of invalid educational qualifications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. onus of verifying credential authenticity rests upon the applicant. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. coordination and consistency in judgments through judicial precedent. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. final order dismissing the original application. (Para 11) |
O R D E R
Per: Hon’ble Shri Santosh Mehra ……Member(A)
Through this OA, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:
“a) CALL for the entire records pertaining to the impugned Order bearing reference No. BDR/ PF / 63907 / PC dated 23.01.2024 passed by the Disciplinary Authority Respondent No.4 as at ANNEXURE A-12 and Order bearing reference No.TC/10070/1/49/PC dated 02.07.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority Respondent No.3 as at ANNEXURE A-14, peruse the same and on perusal;
(b) ISSUE a Writ, Order or directions in the nature of Certiorari setting aside the Order bearing reference No. BDR/ PF /63907/ PC dated 23.01.2024 passed by the Disciplinary Authority Respondent No.4 as at ANNEXURE A-12 and Order bearing reference No.TC/10070/1/49/PC dated 02.07.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority Respondent No.3 as at ANNEXURE A-14, as unjust, arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
(c) ISSUE a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate the applicant into service with all consequential benefits including arrears of pay and allowances from the date of removal from service till the date of reinstatement.
Alternately
ISSUE a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide an opportunity to the applicant to obtain the SSC Certificate (being the essential qualification for the post of HKS) from a recognized Board afresh and to submit the same within a reasonable period, and upon production of such valid certificate, the respondents shall reinstate the applicant and continue him in the service.
(d) ISSUE any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case including an order as to costs, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The facts in in a nutshell are as follows:
The applicant was appointed as HKS (Safaiwala) on 28.02.2017. In response to a complaint submitted by an employee regarding submission of fake certificates, a scrutiny was done and it was found that a few employees including the applicant had submitted fake educational certificates. The same was also confirmed by the clarification received from Directorate of Education. Subsequently, Board of Inquiry was conducted and based on the report of the inquiry a charge memo was issued to the applicant. On the basis of directions of the High Court of Karnataka, denovo inquiry was conducted and based on the findings, the applicant was removed from the service by the Disciplinary Authority. The appeal of the applicant against the Orders of the Disciplinary Authority was rejected by the Appellate Authority. Hence, the applicant has approached this Tribunal through this OA for relief.
3. (i) The counsel for applicant submits that the applicant, in response to the Employment Notification participated in the selection process & was selected / appointed to the post of Safaiwala (under OBC category) on temporary basis vide letter No. BDR/660/2/PC dt. 28.02.2017 and was placed under probation for a period of Two years.
(ii) While the things stood thus, the Respondent No.4 initiated the process of verification of Educational Qualification Certificate of the applicant. The Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi vide letter No.DEL/32587/21/BHS dated 31.08.2021 confirmed the validity of its certificate/marks card issued to the applicant in 2016 as genuine.
(iii) However, the Respondent No.4, based on the Second Respondent's report dated 01.06.2021 that the verification of Secondary School Examination Certificate held by the applica
