Yogesh Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Yogesh Kumar Singh vs Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Delhi Decided Oct 19, 2006

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/716281

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/716281
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Swatanter Kumar and; G.S. Sistani, JJ.
Decided On: Oct 19, 2006
Case Number: WP (C) No. 11460/2004
Subject: Service
Disposition: Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service LawTermination - CRPF--Termination on the ground of furnishing false information regarding criminal antecedents--An intentional mis-statement in verification roll cannot be condoned--No ground to interfere with the challenged order--Hence, Court upheld the order and dismissed petition. - - The petitioner h...

Key legal issue: Service
Outcome / disposition: Petition dismissed
Acts & sections: Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 - Sections 4; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506; Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1949 - Rules 14(B), 16 and 102; Central Civil...

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Yogesh Kumar Singh

Advocate Tamali Wad, Adv

Respondent

Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Advocate Suresh Kait, Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 - Sections 4; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506; Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1949 - Rules 14(B), 16 and 102; Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 - Rule 5 and 5(1)
Cases Referred: Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. v. Ram Ratan Yadav
Reported In: 2006(92)DRJ510

Excerpt

service lawtermination - crpf--termination on the ground of furnishing false information regarding criminal antecedents--an intentional mis-statement in verification roll cannot be condoned--no ground to interfere with the challenged order--hence, court upheld the order and dismissed petition. - - the petitioner had submitted to the respondents as well as placed the judgment dated 3.7.2003 on record wherein he was acquitted. 15. in view of settled position of law as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, which clearly indicate an intentional mis-statement on the part of the petitioner in the form, there is hardly any scope for this court to take a view different then the one taken by the respondents, particularly while holding that action is arbitrary or without jurisdiction......form submitted by the petitioner containing an incorrect and false information. we have already noticed that in reply to column 12a, the petitioner had made an averment and answered the question, which to his knowledge was incorrect or false. this he did despite the warning contained in the opening clause (1) of the form. the petitioner had submitted to the respondents as well as placed the judgment dated 3.7.2003 on record wherein he was acquitted. there is no dispute to the fact that he had filled in the form for employment on 10th april, 2003 when the case was at advance stage. probably even arguments in the case had been concluded by that time. the petitioner had also attained the age of maturity.14. learned counsel for the respondent had relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in the cases of kendriya vidyalaya sangathan and ors. v. ram ratan yadav : (2003)iillj523sc and ram saran v. ig of police, crpf and ors. : air 2006 sc3530 to contend that once an applicant or a candidate makes an incorrect or false entry in his form, it will be a conduct, which can hardly be condoned and termination from service would be justified. even such punishment cannot be said to be disproportionate to such offence as otherwise it would mean to give premium on falsehood.15. in view of settled position of law as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, which clearly indicate an intentional mis-statement on the part of the petitioner in the form, there is hardly any scope for this court to take a view different then the one taken by the respondents, particularly while holding that action is arbitrary or without jurisdiction.16. for the reasons aforestated, this writ petition is dismissed, while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Full Judgment

ORDER

In pursuance of the proviso to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, I, P.J. Singh, Addl. DIGP hereby terminate forthwith the services of No. 035080142 Rt (Ct/GD) Yogesh Kumar Singh and direct that he shall be entitled to claim a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay plus allowances for the period of notice at the same rates at which he was drawing them immediately before the termination of his service, or, as the case may be, for the period by which such notice falls short of one month.

Sd/-(P.J. SINGH)ADIGPGC CRPF New DelhiNo. 035080142 Rt (Ct/GD) Yogesh Kumar GC CRPF New Delhi (Through Principal, RTC-IV, CRPF)Dated, the 6th Dec. 2003 No. R.II.1/03-EC-5/1Copy forwarded to:Principal, RTC-4, CRPF, C/O 56 APO in duplicate for necessary action. Original copy of the order meant for the individual may be handed over to No. 035080142 (Rt(Ct.GD) Yogesh Kumar Singh and his signature in token of having received the same, may be obtained on another copy and forwarded to this office, duly attested for our records. Sd/-(P.J. SINGH)ADIGPGC CRPF New Delhi INTERNALDC(Store)/AC(HQr)/PBC/GC (In triplicate)/FOC-GC/SRC-GC/EC-VI/COMH/SI(A) for information and necessary action.

12. A bare reading of the impugned order shows that the order of termination is neither punitive nor stigmatic. It is an order of termination simplicitor.

13. The exercise of power by the respondent is not punitive but has been exercised on the basis of application form submitted by the petitioner containing an incorrect and false information. We have already noticed that in reply to column 12A, the petitioner had made an averment and answered the question, which to his knowledge was incorrect or false. This he did despite the warning contained in the opening Clause (1) of the Form. The petitioner had submitted to the respondents as well as placed the judgment dated 3.7.2003 on record wherein he was acquitted. There is no dispute to the fact that he had filled in the form for employment on 10th April, 2003 when the case was at advance stage. Probably even arguments in the case had been concluded by that time. The petitioner had also attained the age of maturity.

14. Learned Counsel for the respondent had relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. v. Ram Ratan Yadav : (2003)IILLJ523SC and Ram Saran v. IG of Police, CRPF and Ors. : AIR 2006 SC3530 to contend that once an applicant or a candidate makes an incorrect or false entry in his form, it will be a conduct, which can hardly be condoned and termination from service would be justified. Even such punishment cannot be said to be disproportionate to such offence as otherwise it would mean to give premium on falsehood.

15. In view of settled position of law as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, which clearly indicate an intentional mis-statement on the part of the petitioner in the form, there is hardly any scope for this Court to take a view different then the one taken by the respondents, particularly while holding that action is arbitrary or without jurisdiction.

16. For the reasons aforestated, this writ petition is dismissed, while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2006 Same Parties Yogesh Kumar Singh vs Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Same Subject Service Same Judge Swatanter Kumar and; G.S. Sistani, JJ. Acts & Sections Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 - Sections 4; Indian P...

Service