Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2004 (4) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2004 (4) TMI 618 - SC - Indian Laws


Issues Involved:
The issues involved in this case are the cancellation of appointment based on fraudulent misrepresentation and the application of principles of natural justice in the context of reservation for Other Backward Classes (O.B.C.) in Kendriya Vidyalayas.

Cancellation of Appointment based on Fraudulent Misrepresentation:
The respondent, a teacher, applied for the position of Principal in Kendriya Vidyalayas as an O.B.C. candidate, submitting a caste certificate. However, it was later discovered that the certificate was false, as he concealed his permanent address in Haryana, while the certificate showed him as a resident of Rajasthan. An enquiry found that he did not belong to the O.B.C. category in Haryana. Despite being given opportunities to explain and defend himself, his appointment was cancelled due to fraudulent misrepresentation.

Application of Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant contended that the respondent's fraudulent actions warranted cancellation without further hearing, as he misrepresented his category and residence. On the other hand, the respondent argued that he could have clarified that he was appointed as an open category candidate had he been given another opportunity to be heard. The court emphasized that the principles of natural justice should not be stretched too far and cited precedents to support the flexible application of these principles based on individual circumstances.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court found the respondent guilty of fraud, emphasizing that fraud vitiates every solemn act and that fraudulent misrepresentation is deceitful. Given the seriousness of the fraud committed by the respondent, the Court held that no further opportunity of hearing was necessary. The Court set aside the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal and the High Court, ruling in favor of the appellant and allowing the civil appeal without costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates