Kamal Nayan Mishra vs State Of M.P. & Ors

2. Appellant was appointed as a Peon in the Water Resources Department (Bansagar Project) in the State of Madhya Pradesh on 24.7.1980. Nearly a decade later, on 22.8.1989, the appellant was charge- sheeted in a criminal case for the offences under sections 148, 324/149, 326/149 and 506 IPC. He was acquitted by judgment dated 9.9.2004 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rewa, MP.

4. The Chief Engineer, Bansagar Project (second respondent), referred the attestation form for verification of particulars. After such verification, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Special Cell, Bhopal, by letter dated 14.7.1995 informed the second respondent that appellant had furnished wrong information in regard to the queries in column 12 of the attestation form. On receipt of such report, no show cause notice or charge sheet was issued to the appellant. The appellant continued to work. Nearly seven years later, abruptly the second respondent issued an office order dated 7.3.2002 terminating the services of appellant forthwith "for giving wrong information and concealment of facts in attestation form at the time of initial recruitment and therefore unfit for Government service". The appellant challenged his termination. A learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition by order dated 11.10.2007, upholding the termination, relying upon the decision of this Court in Kendriya Vidalaya Sangthan v. Ram Ratan Yadav - 2003 (3) SCC 437. The writ appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed on 1.5.2008. Appellant has challenged the said order by this appeal by special leave.

12. We also find from an examination of the terms of the attestation form that termination without notice or inquiry was contemplated only in the context of furnishing false information in and around the time of the appointment. Note (1) of the preamble warns that "the furnishing of false information or suppression of any factual information in the attestation form would be a disqualification and is likely to render the candidate unfit for employment. Similarly the certificate at the end of the attestation form states that "I am not aware of any circumstances which might impair my fitness for employment under government. I agree that if the above information is found false or incomplete in any material respect, the appointing authority will have a right to terminate my services without giving notice or showing cause." Be that as it may.

13. The termination of appellant without an inquiry or hearing was illegal and invalid. In the normal course, we would have set aside the termination and directed reinstatement with consequential benefits, reserving liberty to the employer to initiate disciplinary proceedings. But the peculiar facts of this case require us to adopt a slightly difference approach to do complete justice between the parties. We have already pointed out that there are clear indications that the appellant was bonafide under the impression that he was required to give the particulars sought in column (12) of the form with reference to the date of his appointment. Further, the entire matter relates to an attestation form given in 1994 and appellant has already been out of service for more than seven years on account of the illegal termination from service without inquiry on 7.3.2002. We are therefore of the view that interests of justice would be served if the appellant is reinstated with continuity of service and other consequential benefits, dispensing with any further disciplinary action. The appellant will not entitled to any salary for the period 7.3.2002 till today.

14. We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the judgments of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench. The writ petition filed by the appellant before the High Court is allowed, setting aside the termination order dated 7.3.2002. Respondents are directed to reinstate the appellant with continuity of service and other consequential reliefs (except salary for the period 7.3.2002 till date).