Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Sushil Kumar Yadav vs M/O Defence on 15 May, 2025
1 OA No.262/2013
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Original Application No.262/2013
Jabalpur, this Thursday, the 15th day of May, 2025
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Sushil Kumar Yadav, aged about 27 years, S/o Shri Tulsi Ram Yadav, R/o
- Post & Village Saheli, Tehsil Itarsi, Distt. Hoshangabad (M.P.) - 461111.
-Applicant
(By Advocate - Shri Gautam Prasad)
Versus
1. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Defence Production,
South Block, New Delhi - 110011.
2. Chairman/DGOF, Ordnance Factory Board, 'Ayudh Bhawan', 10-A,
Shaheed Khudiram Bose Marg, Kolkata - 700001.
3. The General Manager, Ordnance Factory Itarsi, Itarsi (M.P.) - 461122.
-Respondents
(By Advocate - Smt. Kanak Gaharwar)
(Date of reserving order : 07.04.2025)
ORDER
By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J).
The applicant is aggrieved that he has not been offered appointment to the post of Fireman on the ground that he had suppressed the information regarding his previous employment in CRPF in the attestation form.
2. Brief facts of the case are that in pursuant to Advertisement No.1020/11/2369/1112 (Annexure A-4) for filling up the posts of Fireman Page 1 of 6 ANUPAM2025.05.27 12:58:07 MISHRA +05'30' 2 OA No.262/2013 through direct recruitment, the applicant applied for the said post under the OBC category. The applicant successfully cleared the written examination held on 31.07.2012. Thereafter, he was issued with a blank Police Verification Report/Attestation Form and after filling the same, the applicants submitted the Attestation Form on 10.08.2012. However, the applicant was issued with a show cause notice dated 17.12.2012 (Annexure A-8) alleging that (i) he had suppressed the factual position regarding his previous employment in the CRPF, (ii) while remaining the Government service, he having applied for appointment in OF Itarsi without obtaining NOC from previous employer and (iii) did not furnish information with regard to his place of residence at Raipur, Chhattisgarh from 24.02.2010 to 01.09.2012. In reply to the show cause notice, the applicant submitted that he was not the permanent employee of the CRPF and was discharged from service upon his resignation after completing 44 weeks of training by depositing a sum of Rs.1,26,999/-. Therefore, there was no occasion to submit the NOC from the previous employer. Regarding third objection, the applicant had submitted that from 24.02.2010 to 01.09.2012, he never stayed at a place for one or more than one year and, as such, he did not furnish the said detail in the PVR from. But dissatisfying with the Page 2 of 6 ANUPAM2025.05.27 12:58:07 MISHRA +05'30' 3 OA No.262/2013 explanation of the applicant, the respondents have rejected the candidature of the applicant on the grounds alleged in the show cause notice.
3. In their reply, the respondents have stated that as per column No.11(a) and (b) of the Attestation Form, the individual is required to disclose about his past services, if any. The applicant wrote 'No' leaving the proforma blank. Subsequently, a complaint was received against the applicant that he was in service under CRPF and posted in Chhattisgarh State. Therefore, matter was referred to Commandant, CRPF, Raipur vide letter dated 01.10.2012 to enquire whether the applicant was employed in CRPF and if so, the details therefore. In response, the Commandant, CRPF vide letter dated 26.10.2012 informed that the applicant was appointed in CRPF on 24.10.2010 and his resignation was accepted on 01.09.2012. Therefore, in view of the material information suppressed by the applicant, he was issued with a show cause notice and after obtaining legal opinion, his candidature has been rejected.
4. The applicant has also filed rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents reiterating his earlier stand.
Page 3 of 6
ANUPAM2025.05.27 12:58:07 MISHRA +05'30' 4 OA No.262/2013
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and the documents available on record.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the information sought in column No.11(a) and (b) even if suppressed was not that material to render the applicant unsuitable for the post. He placed reliance on a decision of this Tribunal in Original Application No.200/540/2016 dated 05.01.2023. Learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance on a decision of the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in Original Application No.2179/2022 dated 16.09.2022 and stated that the similar issue has already been decided by the Principal Bench.
7. The mandate under column 11(a) and 11 (b) of the Attestation Form is as under:
"11(a) Are you holding or have any time held an appointment under the Central or State Government or a semi Govt. or a quasi Govt body, or an autonomous body, or a public undertaking, or a private firm or a institution? If so, give full particulars with dates of employment up-to-date. 11(b) If the previous employment was under the Government of India, a State Government/an undertaking owned or controlled by the Govt. of India or a State Govt./an autonomous body/University/Local body. If you had left service on giving a month's notice under rule 5 of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, or any similar corresponding rules where any disciplinary proceedings framed against you, or had you been called upon to explain your conduct in any matter at Page 4 of 6 ANUPAM2025.05.27 12:58:07 MISHRA +05'30' 5 OA No.262/2013 the time you gave notice of termination of service, or a t a subsequent date, before your services actually terminated?
7.1 The applicant answered in negative in both the columns 11(a) and 11(b).
8. It is pertinent to note that the advertisement for filling up the posts of Fireman was issued in the Rojgar Samachar dated 21st to 27th January, 2012 on which date the applicant was employed with the CRPF. It is clearly evident that before applying for the post in question, the applicant had not obtained NOC from the CRPF. The resignation of the applicant was accepted by the CRPF on 01.09.2012 while the applicant had filled up the Attestation Form on 10.08.2012, i.e. prior to his resignation, without disclosing the information regarding his employment with the CRPF. It can safely be assumed that the applicant had resigned after his selection as 'Fireman' with the respondents and not only he had not obtained NOC from the previous employer CRPF but also did not disclose regarding his employment with the CRPF in the Attestation Form. The question is not whether the applicant is suitable for the post. In fact, the information sought by the employer if not disclosed as required, would definitely amount to suppression of material information.
Page 5 of 6
ANUPAM2025.05.27 12:58:07 MISHRA +05'30' 6 OA No.262/2013
9. The order of the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in OA No.2179/2022 relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant gives an impression that the applicant therein had already resigned from the post of 'Jail Warder' before his selection to the post of Constable (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police and in such circumstances, the omission on his part labeling it as concealment of his previous employment was condoned by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal while allowing the Original Application. But in the present case, the applicant was under employment with the CRPF before applying for the post of Fireman and even on roll with the CRPF when he was selected for the post of Fireman. Hence, the deliberate suppression on the part of the applicant cannot be ignored.
10. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit in this Original Application and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Mallika Arya) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
am/-
Page 6 of 6
ANUPAM2025.05.27
12:58:07
MISHRA +05'30'