Employee Who Made False Declaration/ Suppressed Involvement In Criminal Case Not Entitled To Appointment/Continue In Service As A Matter Of Right: SC

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• The Supreme Court in a recent case said that an employee who made false or suppressed evidence in a criminal case will not be entitled to continue in service as a matter of right.
• This judgement set aside the verdict of Rajasthan High Court which quashed the order terminating the services of employment for non disclosure at time of application for appointment

CASE BACKGROUND

• An employee of a private firm Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Parasaran Nigam Ltd. was terminated after it was discovered that he had been convicted of a criminal case.
• The company's documents verification revealed that he had a criminal record, which was not so as per the declaration provided by him.
• Aggrieved by the termination, the employee approached the High Court challenging such actions taken by the company

COURT’S OBSERVATION

• One of the arguments raised by the employee was that he must be granted the benefit of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act,1958 that doesn’t allow disqualification on the basis of conviction.
• The Court observed that Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act 1958 should not be used to the extent that a person falsely states that he has not been convicted or arrested in any criminal case.
• The Court noted that even if the employee has been acquitted in a criminal case, he or she shall not be entitled to appointment as a matter of right under the circumstances.
• The credibility and trustworthiness of an employee is to be looked upon as the employer may not have hired him if they knew that piece of information..

COURT’S ORDER

• The Court held that an employee, in such a case cannot be relied on even in the future and that the employer can not be forced to continue with the same employee.
• However, the choice must be given to the employer to continue or discontinue with such case.
• Therefore, the Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the respondent-employee and the order of termination was restored.

Hope you enjoyed reading this. Here are a few questions for you, let us know your answers in the comments section

• What does Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act talk about?
• Do you agree with the court’s ruling?