Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 801
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Hon’ble Chief Justice, CJ, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajnesh Oswal, J
Mir Sajad Hussain – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K – Respondent
WP(C) No.3372/2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Shuja-ul-Haq
For the Respondents: Mr. Waseem Gul, GA, with Ms. Shaila Shameem, Assisting Counsel
An appointment based on forged documents is void ab initio, exempting the need for a hearing before termination.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Principle of natural justice not applicable when appointment is based on fake documents. - The petitioners were appointed to the position based on forged documents, which led to their appointment being void ab initio. (Para 11)
(B) Employment Law - Termination of Appointment - No opportunity necessary to be provided when appointment was illegitimate from inception. - Where an appointment is found to be illegal, there exists no employer-employee relationship, negating any requirement for a hearing to be afforded. (Para 12)
(C) Employment Law - Burden of Proof - It is incumbent upon the petitioners to demonstrate a legal right for continued employment. - The petitioners failed to prove any legitimate claim to their position, as the selection process was not valid nor notified. (Para 18)
(D) Judicial Review - Tribunal’s dismissal upheld as justified, with no evidence supporting legitimacy of petitioners’ appointments. - The petitioners did not provide adequate evidence to overturn the Tribunal's findings related to their appointment status. (Para 13)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of illegal appointments based on forged documents. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments concerning lack of natural justice in terminations. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's requirement for proof of legitimacy regarding appointments. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. findings that no hearing is needed when appointments are void. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. final ruling confirming dismissal as justified based on the evidence. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT
OSWAL ‘J’
1) The petitioners claim to have been appointed as Assistant Handicrafts Training Officers initially on a probation period of two years vide order dated 26.04.2018 issued by respondent No.2. The petitioner No.1 and 3 were posted in District Baramulla whereas petitioner No.2 was posted in District Kulgam. However, vide order dated 24.12.2020 followed by communication dated 11.01.2021 issued by respondent No.2, the appointment of the petitioners ab initio was cancelled and process for recovery of illegally drawn amount on account of salary/other emoluments by the petitioners was directed to be initiated by respondent No.3 and 4.
2) The petitioners being aggrieved of the order and communication (supra) assailed the same before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench (for short “the Tribunal”) through the medium of OA No.220 of 2021, on the grounds that the orders impugned were issued by the respondents in utter violation of principles of natural justice. 3) The claim of the petitioners was objected to by the respondents by submitting that the petitioners were appointed to the post of Assistant Handicrafts Training Officer on fake and fabricated letter as their names were never recommended by the Service Selection Board in the main list by which the names of the selected candidates were recommended to the department vide order dated 26.04.2017. The names of the petitioners were neither figuring in the select list nor in the waiting list but subsequently fake letter of recommendation was issued, on the basis of which the petitioners came to be appointed. An FIR bearing No.29/2021 stands already registered and the matter is pending before the court of competent criminal jurisdiction.
4) The learned Tribunal vide order dated 25.08.2023 dismissed the OA preferred by the petitioners by returning a finding that the petitioners were in service on the basis forged documents and their appointment was non-est right from the very beginning.
5) Feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 25.08.2023 passed by the learned Tribunal, the petitioners have assailed the same through the medium of instant petition on the identical grounds as were urged before the learned Tribunal. The respondents in their response reiterated their stand by stating that the Additional Commissioner, Kashmir (the then Secretary SSB, J&K) vide his letter dated 04.12.2020, while requesting for lodging of FIR with the Crime Branch, had revealed that the selection list dated 15.03.2018 was forwarded to the Industries and Commerce Department with his fake signatures and, accordingly, FIR No.29/2021 was registered with Crime Branch, Kashmir, under Section 420 , 468, 471, 120-B IPC read with Section 5 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act . It was further stated that the Administrative Department vide letter dated 23.12.2020 authorized the ab initio Directorate of Handicrafts, Kashmir, to cancel the appointment orders of the petitioners and, accordingly, vide order dated 24.12.2020, the appointment orders of the ab initio petitioners were cancelled . Vide communication dated 11.01.2021, Assistant Director, Kulgam/Baramulla were directed to initiate the process of recovery of illegally drawn amount on account of salary/other emoluments by the petitioners during their tenure as Assistant Handicrafts Training Officers and remit the same into the Government Treasury.
6) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been condemned unheard but the learned Tribunal has not rightly appreciated the contention of the petitioner
