1. Probationary employees terminated for obtaining training through forged sponsorship letters — Employer's cancellation of appointment challenged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 8175
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S. Supehia, R. T. Vachhani, JJ
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Shaikh Asif Ahmed Mohammed Hanif – Respondent
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 812 of 2025 | R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 814 of 2025
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: G H Virk, Simranjitsingh H Virk
For the Respondents: Sahil M Shah, Sanket K Pandya, Shalin Mehta, K M Antani
For the Appellants/Petitioners: G H Virk, Simranjitsingh H Virk
For the Respondents: Sahil M Shah, Sanket K Pandya, Shalin Mehta, K M Antani
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
service law
- appointment
- disciplinary proceedings
- termination of service
-
constitutional law
-
right to equality
- discrimination in disciplinary action (Para 50)
-
right to equality
- administrative law
Table of Contents
2. Employer argued fraud vitiates appointment; employees contended past act not misconduct and employer lacked authority. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 )
3. Appeals allowed — Termination upheld — Single judge's order setting aside termination quashed. (Para 51 )
4. Can an employee be subjected to disciplinary proceedings for acts committed prior to appointment?
Yes, if the act involves fraud or production of forged documents that have a direct nexus with employment, as the employer retains authority to verify documents at any stage. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 )
5. What is the scope of judicial review in departmental disciplinary proceedings?
Courts examine only whether inquiry was by competent authority, natural justice complied, and findings based on some evidence; not correctness of conclusion. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 )
6. Does the doctrine of 'fraud vitiates everything' apply to appointment obtained through forged documents?
Yes, fraud vitiates the entire action; appointment secured by fraud is voidable at employer's option and can be terminated even after long service. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 )
7. Can an employee claim discrimination if other similarly situated employees are not punished?
No; equality under Article 14 is a positive concept and cannot be enforced to perpetuate illegality. (Para 50 )
8. Does a clause in an advertisement allowing cancellation if documents are found false cover documents produced before appointment?
Yes, it empowers the employer to verify documents that have direct nexus with employment at any stage, including pre-appointment acts. (Para 47 , 48 )
COMMON CAV JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Since the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals arise from the similar judgement and order, the facts of Letters Patent Appeal No.814 of 2025 in Special Civil Application No.12699 of 2024 are incorporated hereinabove.
FACTS
2. The appeal is directed against the CAV judgement dated 20.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition, whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition by setting aside the order of termination of the respondents-original petitioners, who were appointed as Station Fire Officers by the appellant - Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (“the appellant-Corporation” for short) on probation from 2016 to 2019.
3. Pursuant to the advertisement issued on 26.10.2018 for filling-up the post of Station Fire Officer, the respondents-original petitioners applied for the said post. One of the qualifications, as mentioned in the advertisement, was that a candidate must possess Station Officer’s Course of Training at the National Fire Service College (NFSC), Nagpur. Accordingly, the respondents were declared successful in the recruitment process and appointed as Station Fire Officers on 28.05.2019. It appears that due to some private complaint received, the appellant-Corporation called upon the respondents on 30.11.2022 to provide the evidence with regard to their entry into the NFSC, Nagpur. While the respondents were on probation, show-cause notices were issued on 24.08.2023 for termination of their service. The respondents assailed the same by filing writ petitions being Special Civil Application No.16166 of 2023 and allied matters before this Court. By a common order dated 26.10.2023, this Court directed the appellant-Corporation to conduct a departmental inquiry in accordance with Rule 9 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1971 and accordingly, the appellant-Corporation issued charge-sheets dated 01.01.2024 for holding the departmental inquiry for an illegal entry in the NFSC, Nagpur, by producing false recommendations. It appears that again a writ petition was filed being Special Civil Application No.2436 of 2024 raising grievance against the departmental inquiry. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 19.02.2024 reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner(s) therein to rely upon any lacuna in the departmental proceedings in case, the same is challenged or resulted in punishment.
4. After the regular departmental inquiry was conducted, the Inquiry Officer, vide an Inquiry Report dated 10.06.2024, held the charges as proved. Accordingly, a final show-cause notice dated 29.07.2024 was issued by the appellant- Corporation to the respondents, which was thereafter, challenged by filing a writ petition being Special Civil Application No.11894 of 2004 challenging the inquiry report as well as the charge-sheet(s) dated 01.01.2024. By the order dated 09.08.2024, this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the appellant-Corporation to accept the representation of the respondents opposing the departmental proceedings conducted against them.
5. Thereafter, the respondents made a representation dated 16.08.2024 and accordingly, final orders of punishment dated 22.08.2024 terminating the services of the respondents was passed. The respondents thereafter, challenged the aforesaid actions, including the departmental proceedings by filing the captioned writ petition being Special Civil Application No.12699 of 2024. Learned Single Judge has allowed the said writ petition, which has given rise to the present appeals.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT-CORPORATION
6. Learned advocate Mr.Virk appearing for the appellant-Corporation at the outset, has submitted that the respondents-original petitioners, while getting admission in NFSC, Nagpur, for the course of Sub-Officer’s Training have produced false recommendations of the respective entities. It is submitted that the respondent No.1 had secur
