Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Arun Kumar Son Of Ram Sewak Yadav vs Union Of India Through Its Secretary To ... on 30 May, 2014
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1147/CH/2013
Order Reserved on 28.5.2014
Pronounced on 30.5.2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A)
HON'BLE DR. BRAHM A. AGRAWAL, MEMBER (J)
Arun Kumar son of Ram Sewak Yadav, AF Stn Highgrounds, Chandigarh-04.
Applicant
Versus
1. Union of India through its Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi.
2. The Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi.
3. No.1 Tettra School, Air Force Station High Grounds, Chandigarh-160004 through its Station Commander.
Respondents
Present: Sh. Sushil Saini, counsel for the applicant.
Ms. Nimrat K. Gill, counsel for the respondents.
O R D E R
BY HON'BLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A)
1. This O.A. has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
8. It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the directions may kindly be issued to the respondents to reinstate the applicant by setting aside the illegal order of termination dated 13.8.2013 (Annexure A-1) in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned in the present application, in the interest of justice.
2. It is contended in the OA that the applicant was appointed as Lascar at No.1, Tettra School, Air Force Station in the pay scale of Rs.5200-20200 vide order dated 27.8.2012 (Annexure A-2). However, his services have been terminated through order dated 13.8.2013 (Annexure A-1).
3. In the ground for relief it has been stated as follows:
(i) Service of the applicant apparently seems to be terminated on account of some latent misconduct against the applicant and the same was not disclosed. Hence, termination of the applicant is punitive one, if the veil is lifted from the action of the respondents. Therefore, termination of the applicant is based on misconduct, which cannot be affected without holding an enquiry and affording any opportunity of hearing. Therefore, impugned order is in violation of principles of natural justice and liable to be set aside.
(ii) There is a clear stipulation in the recruitment letter that in case of termination of the applicant during the probationary period, one month notice or pay in lieu thereof is to be paid, but respondents while terminating the services of the applicant has issued an empty tiger establishing the claim of the applicant of one month salary in lieu of notice, whereas one month salary is to be paid simultaneously along with termination letter. Therefore, impugned order is in utter violation of Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965.
4. Counter reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stated that minimum educational qualification for the post of Lascar is 10th Class (Matriculation) pass. The applicant, in support of his educational qualification, had submitted Secondary School Certificate Examination, 2011 certificate bearing Sl. No.388004 and Roll No.768004, purportedly issued by Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi and its supporting Marks sheet bearing the same Sl. No. and Roll No. As per this certificate the applicant is supposed to have appeared in the said examination through Prashant Public Senior Secondary School, Lucknow. The copy of marks sheet and certificate of secondary examination in respect of the applicant are annexed as Annexure R-2 and R-3 respectively. During June 2013, it was revealed that the report on verification of character and antecedents received in respect of the applicant, prior to his appointment, was not in order. Accordingly, verification of character and antecedents, including educational qualification of the applicant was once again ordered through the IAF Police. After verification 4 Provost and Security Unit, Kanpur, vide their letter 4PM/S7417/1/Prov dated 08.8.2013 informed that no verification record was found at the offices of SP and SSP, Lucknow and further that Prashant Public School could not be located in Lucknow (Annexure R-4). Thereafter, Board of Higher Secondary Education, Delhi SBS Nagar was approached and the Board vide its letter bhsed/492/2013 dated 8.8.2013, intimated that the certificate and marks sheet submitted by the applicant had not been issued by them. Alongwith this letter, the Board also gave sample copies of Higher Secondary Examination (10th Class) certificates and marks sheet issued by them to their candidates (Annexure R-5).
5. Thus, the verification by the Provost and Security Units revealed that the applicant had submitted forged certificate and mark sheet in respect of his educational qualification. Therefore, he was ineligible for appointment to the post of Lascar. As per the terms and conditions of his appointment, he was on probation for two years from the date of his appointment, i.e.27.8.2012 (Para 2(b) of the appointment letter dated 27.8.2012 refers). In terms of DOPT OM No.36011/1/2012-Estt(Res) dated 10.1.2013, Wherever it is found that a Govt. Servant, who was not qualified or eligible in terms of the recruitment rules etc, for initial recruitment in service or had furnished false information or produced a false certificate in order to secure appointment, he should not be retained in service. If, he is a probationer or a temporary govt. servant, he should be discharged or his services should be terminated. (Annexure R-6). As such the services of the applicant were terminated on 13.8.2013 vide termination order 1TS/C 2152/1/PC dated 13.8.2013. The order of termination is termination simpliciter, without any attached stigma and the applicant was paid salary in lieu of one month notice period.
6. Rejoinder was not filed on behalf of the applicant inspite of several opportunities being allowed in this regard and the right of the applicant to file rejoinder stands forfeited in view of the order dated 6.5.2014.
7. Arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties were heard. Learned counsel for the applicant reiterated facts and grounds taken in the OA and stated that the termination of services of the applicant without proper inquiry and without affording the applicant opportunity to be heard was bad in law.
8. Learned counsel for the respondents referred to the contents of counter reply and stated that the documents on the basis of which the applicant had been recruited as LASCAR had been found to be fake/forged as per verification reports that had been appended as R-4 and R-5. Hence termination of the services of the applicant had been ordered keeping in view OM No.36011/1/2012-Estt.(Res.) dated 10.1.2003 (R-6) and there was no merit in this O.A.
9. We have carefully considered the matter. From the material on record it is established that the applicant had obtained his appointment on the basis of fake documents. Such appointment is not sustainable and his services have rightly been terminated.
10. Hence the OA is rejected. No costs.
(DR. BRAHM A. AGRAWAL) (RAJWANT SANDHU) MEMBER (J) MEMBER (A) Place: Chandigarh. Dated: .2014. KR* 5 O.A No.1147/CH/2013