Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

13. Even the Applicant's own conduct belies the existence of the purported order. She filed a Review Petition before the Minister of State (IC), yet made no reference to the alleged order dated 13.05.2019. This clearly indicates that she was aware that the said document was false and fabricated. The Applicant has also relied upon documents that she was not authorized to possess, and reliance on such unauthenticated or illegally procured documents is untenable.

14. The present Application, therefore, rests upon concealment of material facts and misrepresentation. The Applicant participated fully in the departmental inquiry, was with afforded ample opportunity to defend herself, and did not raise any objections to the inquiry proceedings at any stage. Her statements are contradictory and cast doubt on the genuineness of the documents relied upon by her. She has also failed to exhaust her statutory remedies, as the Review Petition filed by her is still pending before the President, Governing Body.

36. Learned counsel also points out that the Applicanthas placed on record certain documents which are not supposed to be in her possession and whose procurement is unexplained.

with Reliance on such unauthorized documents is impermissible and further taints her conduct.

37. In view of the above submissions, it is submitted that the present Original Application is wholly devoid of merit, suffers from concealment of material facts, and is based on misrepresentation. The Applicantduly participated in the inquiry and never objected to the proceedings at any stage. The penalty imposed is lawful, justified, and in consonance with established rules governing fraudulent entry into service. The OA, therefore, deserves to be dismissed. Facts in a nutshell:-