KAMAL NAYAN MISHRA versus STATE OF M.P. & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 16 S.C.R. 237 · Decided: 07-12-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 16 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 237 
KAMAL NAYAN MISHRA 
A 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 8317 of 2009) 
DECEMBER 7, 2009 
B 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, JJ.] 
SERVICE LAW: 
> 
Termination of services of a confirmed employee for 
furnishing incorrect information in attestation form - Employee c 
appointed in service in 1980 -
In 1989 prosecuted for 
offences punishable ulss 148, 3241149, 3261149 and 506 /PC, 
but acquitted - In 1994 employee required to fill in attestation 
form against column 12 whereof with regard to query about 
arrest ,prosecution, detention etc. he wrote 'NO' - On 7.3.2002, 
D 
employee abruptly dismissed from service for giving wrong 
information and concealment of facts in attestation form -
High Court relying upon Ram Ratan Yadav's case*, 
dismissing writ petition of employee - Held: The ratio 
decidendi of Ram Ratan Yadav's case is, where an employee 
E 
(probationer) is required to give his personal data in an 
attestation form in connection with his appointment (either at 
the time of or thereafter), if it is found that the employee had 
suppressed or given false information in regard to matters 
-I 
which had a bearing on his fitness or suitability to the post, 
F 
he could be terminated from service during the period of 
probation without holding any inquiry -
The said decision 
dealt with a probationer and not a holder of a civil post, and 
nowhere laid down a proposition that a confirmed employee 
holding a civil post under the State, could be terminated from 
G 
service for furnishing information .in an attestation form, 
without giving an opportunity to meet the charges against him 
- A confirmed government servant is the holder of a civil post 
entitled to the benefits of the safeguards provided by Article 
237 
H 
238 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 16 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A 311 of the Constitution - If it is found that the government 
servant who is holder of a civil post, has given any false 
information during the course of employment, that will have 
to be treated as a misconduct, and punishment can be 
imposed only after subjecting him to appropriate disciplinary 
B proceedings as per the relevant rules - The termination of the 
employee without an inquiry or hearing was illegal and invalid 
- There are clear indications that the employee was bona fide 
under the impression that he was required to give the 
particulars sought in column (12) of the form with reference 
c to the date of his appointment - Further, the entire matter 
relates to an attestation form given in 1994 and employee has 
already been out of service for more than seven years on 
account of the illegal termination from service without inquiry 
- Therefore, interests of justice would be served if the 
0 employee is reinstated with continuity of service and other 
consequential benefits dispensing with any further disciplinary 
action, but he will not be entitled to any salary for the period 
from the date of his termination till date - Ordered accordingly 
- Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 311. 
E 
Moti Ram Deka vs. General Manager, N.E. Frontier 
F 
G 
Railway (1964) 5 SCR 683, relied on. 
*Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangthan vs . Ram Ratan Yadav 
2003(3) sec 437, distinguished. 
Ajit Singh vs. State of Punjab 1983 (2) SCC 217, 
referred to. 
Case Law Reference: 
2003(3) sec 437 
1983 (2) sec 211 
(1964) 5 SCR 683 
distinguished 
Referred to 
relied on 
para 4 
para 7 
para 11 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
H 8317 of 2009. 
> 
KAMAL NAYAN MISHRA v. STATE OF M.P. & ORS. 
239 
From the Judgment & Order dated 1.5.2008 of the High 
A 
Court of Judicature at Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh in Writ 
Appeal No. 378 of 2008. 
Ashok Kumar Gupta, (SCLSC) for the Appellant. 
Vikas Upadhyay, B.S. Banthia for the Respondents. 
8 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
ORDER 
R.V. RAVEENDRAN J. 1. Leave granted. Heard the 
C 
parties. 
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 o 
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. 
3. In the year 1994, the appellant was required to submit 
E 
an attestation form giving his personal data in regard to his 
educational qualifications, antecedents etc. He 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.