Suppression Of Criminal History From Employer Ground For Cancellation Of Candidature/ Dismissal From Service: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that there cannot be any suppression as to information about conviction/acquittal or arrest or pendency of criminal case by any candidate seeking employment. The Court held that if there is any suppression of fact regarding criminal history, it can lead to cancellation of candidature or termination from service.

Relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and others and Rajasthan Rajya Vidhut Prasaran Nigam Limited Vs. Anil Kanwaria, the bench comprising of Justice Salil Kumar Rai and Justice Surendra Singh-I held,

“From considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Avtar Singh (supra) and Rajasthan Rajya Vidhut Prasaran Nigam Limited (supra) it can be concluded that the information given to the employer by a candidate as to the conviction/acquittal or arrest or pendency of criminal case whether before or after entering into the service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information. Any contravention made by the candidate shall cause cancellation of his candidature, dismissal from service if already appointed.”

The Court upheld the cancellation of candidature on grounds that the appellant had failed to correct the error in his application form for 10 months and had only disclosed the fact of pendency of a criminal case against him when he was asked to give an undertaking on affidavit.

Factual Background

Appellant applied for the post of Orderly/Peon/Office Peon/Farrash in an advertisement issued by the Allahabad High Court. In the online form, against the column of “Whether any criminal complaint case have been registered against you?”, appellant filled in the reply column as “No”. Appellant qualified the selection rounds and was declared successful. Thereafter, appellant was required to submit an affidavit declaring his criminal history.

Appellant claimed that he had submitted affidavit disclosing the criminal case pending against him. Subsequently, his candidature was cancelled as the guidelines issued by the High Court specifically provided that candidature must be cancelled if the candidate has not disclosed the criminal cases pending against him. The Single Judge bench of the High Court upheld the cancellation of appellant's candidature. Subsequently, he filed a special appeal against the order.

Counsel for appellant-petitioner argued that Single Judge had not correctly applied the decision of the Supreme Court in Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and others. It was argued that the computer operator who had helped the appellant in filling the form had made the error. It was only at the stage of verification of documents that the petitioner came to know of the error in the form.

It was argued that the appellant submitted the affidavit disclosing the correct information about the criminal case pending against him before issuance of show cause notice. It was argued that the cancellation of appellant's candidature was done without proper application of mind. It was argued that mere pendency of criminal case should not be a ground for cancellation of candidature. An undertaking should be taken stating that if convicted, then he shall be dismissed from service.

Per contra, counsel for the Allahabad High Court argued that despite providing a window for making corrections on the online applications, the appellant made no efforts to correct the alleged error. The affidavit disclosing the pendency of criminal case was filed 10months after the online form was filled. It was argued the error was deliberate rather than inadvertent.

High Court Verdict

The Supreme Court in Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and others has laid down broad guidelines to be applied for verification of disclosure made by a candidate to the employer for deciding the issue cancellation of candidature/ termination of services. In paragraph 38.1, 38.2 and 38.3 the Apex Court held that

“38.1 Information given to the employer by a candidate as to conviction, acquittal or arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information.

38.2 While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information.

38.3 The employer shall take into consideration the Government orders/instructions/rules, applicable to the employee, at the time of taking the decision.”

The Court further relied on Rajasthan Rajya Vidhut Prasaran Nigam Limited Vs. Anil Kanwaria wherein the Apex Court held that once the person seeking employment has supressed information regarding conviction/ criminal proceedings, subsequent acquittal does not grant him employment as a matter of right.

The Court observed that the appellant had made no efforts to correct the error made in the online application form, and it was only when he was asked to furnish an undertaking on affidavit, he disclosed the pendency of a criminal case against him.

The Court held that the appellant cannot plead to be covered by paragraphs 38.2 and 38.3 of the Avtar Singh case and not be covered by 38.1 since there are no special circumstances in his favour. The Court held that the appellant had deliberately concealed the pendency of a criminal case against him in his application form.

Accordingly, the Court upheld the cancellation of his candidature and dismissed the appeal.

Case Title: Chandrajeet Kumar Gond vs. High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 48 [SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 777 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 48

Click Here To Read/Download Order