# B.S. Negi v. G.M., Syndicate Bank and others

- **Citation:** (2006) 1 ILRA 92
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2006-01-12
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29283 of 1994
- **Bench:** Dr. B.S. Chauhan, Dilip Gupta
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/b-s-negi-v-g-m-syndicate-bank-and-others-40805
- **Pages:** 9

## Headnote

Constitution
of
India,
Art.-226appointment based on false declarationbelonging to a caste of 'Naik'-as S.T.
Community-petitioner given certificate
issued by Tehsildar Garh MukteshwarRegional office of Bank on the basis of
information
from-SC/ST
commissionshow cause notice issued-after reply the
disciplinary authority held guilty of false
declaration
caste
held-appointment
based on false caste certificate-such
employee
deserves
no
sympathypunishment of dismissal-held proper.

Held: Para 10 & 11

From the aforesaid decisions of the
Supreme Court it is clear that where it is
found that the petitioner does not belong
to the caste indicated by him while
seeking appointment then the very basis
of his appointment is taken away and
such appointment is no appointment in
the eye of law and such a person also
does not deserve any sympathy and
indulgence of the Courts.
1 All] B.S. Negi V. G.M., Syndicate Bank and others
93
In view of the proposition of law laid
down by the Supreme Court in the
aforesaid decisions, we are of the
opinion that the very foundation of the
appointment of the petitioner was void
and
non-est
and,
therefore,
the
Disciplinary Authority was justified in
imposing the punishment.
Case law discussed:
1994 (6) SCC-241
2004 (2) SCC-105
2005 (7) SCC-690
2005 (8) SCC-283

## Text

92 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
Control and Eviction Officer by the
impugned order declared the vacancy on
the ground that shop in dispute was not
being used by the petitioner. In my
opinion, the order is illegal. Even if a
commercial accommodation is not being
used. It does not give rise to vacancy
under any of the provisions of Section 12
of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Rent Control
and eviction Officer also found that
petitioner had constructed some shops
which were adjacent to the shop in
dispute. This also could not give rise to
vacancy in the case of commercial
accommodation. Acquisition of another
accommodation is a ground of vacancy
only in the case of residential building.

5. Accordingly, writ petition is
allowed. Impugned judgment and order
declaring vacancy is set aside.

6. I have held in Khursheeda vs.
A.D.J. 2004 (2) A.R.C.64 that while
granting relief against eviction to the
tenant in respect of building covered by
Rent
Control
Act,
writ
court
is
empowered to enhance the rent to a
reasonable extent. Rent of Rs. 5/- per
month for a shop in Saharanpur is
virtually as well as actually no rent. By
paying such a highly inadequate rent for
several decades petitioner must have
saved a lot of money. Money saved is
money earned. Accordingly it is directed
that with effect from February,2006
onwards petitioner shall pay rent to the
landlord @ 750/- per month. If there is
any dispute of landlord ship then rent at
the above rate may be deposited by the
tenant under section 30(2) of U.P. Act No.
13 of 1972.
---------

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.01.2006

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.
THE HON'BLE DILIP GUPTA, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29283 of 1994

B.S. Negi

...Petitioner
Versus
General Manager, Syndicate Bank and
others

 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri P.K. Jain
Sri Hari Om Khare

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri P.K. Singhal
S.C.

Constitution
of
India,
Art.-226appointment based on false declarationbelonging to a caste of 'Naik'-as S.T.
Community-petitioner given certificate
issued by Tehsildar Garh MukteshwarRegional office of Bank on the basis of
information
from-SC/ST
commissionshow cause notice issued-after reply the
disciplinary authority held guilty of false
declaration
caste
held-appointment
based on false caste certificate-such
employee
deserves
no
sympathypunishment of dismissal-held proper.

Held: Para 10 & 11

From the aforesaid decisions of the
Supreme Court it is clear that where it is
found that the petitioner does not belong
to the caste indicated by him while
seeking appointment then the very basis
of his appointment is taken away and
such appointment is no appointment in
the eye of law and such a person also
does not deserve any sympathy and
indulgence of the Courts.
1 All] B.S. Negi V. G.M., Syndicate Bank and others
93
In view of the proposition of law laid
down by the Supreme Court in the
aforesaid decisions, we are of the
opinion that the very foundation of the
appointment of the petitioner was void
and
non-est
and,
therefore,
the
Disciplinary Authority was justified in
imposing the punishment.
Case law discussed:
1994 (6) SCC-241
2004 (2) SCC-105
2005 (7) SCC-690
2005 (8) SCC-283

(Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.)

1. This writ petition has been filed
for quashing the order dated 12th March,
1994 passed by the Deputy General
Manager of the Syndicate Bank by which
the petitioner was dismissed from the
services of the Bank with immediate
effect and the order dated 14th June, 1994
passed
by
the
Appellate
Authority
dismissing the appeal filed by the
petitioner against the aforesaid order.

2. The petitioner was served with a
charge-sheet dated 14th January, 1988
containing the charge that he had joined
the services of the Bank on 29th January,
1980 as a Clerk by declaring that he
belonged
to
the
Scheduled
Tribe
Community which fact was not true and,
therefore, by wrongly deriving the benefit
meant
for
candidates
belonging
to
Scheduled Tribe he had committed act of
gross misconduct. An enquiry was held
and the Enquiring Authority submitted a
detailed report dated 2nd December,
1993. It mentions that the petitioner had
submitted an application on 26th October,
1979 for seeking appointment stating that
he belonged to Scheduled Tribe Category
and after getting through the examination
he submitted the application dated 14th
February,
1980
enclosing
certain
documents including the certificate dated
20th January, 1977 purported to have
been issued by Sri Pratap Singh Negi
M.P. Lok Sabha certifying that the
petitioner belongs to Naik Caste which
comes under Scheduled Tribe. The
petitioner
was
asked
to
submit
a
certificate from the Competent Authority,
as M.P. was not the competent authority
to issue the certificate. The petitioner then
submitted a certificate purported to have
been issued by the Tehsildar Garh
Mukteshwar stating that the petitioner
belongs
to
village
Haripur,
Tehsil
Kotdwara, district Pauri Garhwal and
belongs to Naik caste which has been
recognised as Scheduled Tribe. The
Regional Office, however, informed the
Bank on the basis of information received
from the Commission for SCs/STs,
Government of India, New Delhi that
Naik Community is neither Scheduled
Caste nor Scheduled Tribe in Uttar
Pradesh. The petitioner was, therefore,
asked to submit a certificate of the
competent authority where he or his
family normally resided. The petitioner
this time submitted a certificate dated 31st
December, 1984 issued by the Tehsildar
Meerut that the petitioner belongs to
Boksha Naik which is a Scheduled Tribe.
The report of the Enquiry Officer further
mentions that on making enquiries by the
authority
it
was
revealed that the
petitioner does not belong to Boksha Naik
but belongs to Sawarna Hindu Rajpoot
Jati which is not a Backward Caste. This
fact was also confirmed by the certificate
issued by the District Magistrate Garhwal
to which place the petitioner belongs. It
has also been stated that the earlier
certificate issued by the Tehsildar Meerut
was, accordingly, annulled. In these
circumstances the Enquiry Officer has
concluded that the petitioner has wrongly
94 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
derived benefit which was made available
to SC/ST Category by producing false
certificates. The Enquiry Officer has also
noted that initially the evidence was
recorded ex-parte as the petitioner did not
appear but subsequently the petitioner
made
an
application
before
the
Disciplinary Authority to advice the
Enquiry Officer to permit him to depose
with the stipulation that he will not seek
permission for cross examination of the
Management witnesses. On such an
application
having
been
filed,
the
petitioner was given an opportunity to
place his case.

3. The Disciplinary Authority
thereafter issued notice to the petitioner to
submit his comments on the report of the
Enquiry Officer as to why the proposed
punishment should not be imposed upon
him. The petitioner submitted a reply and
the Disciplinary Authority after a careful
analysis of the materials available on
record concluded that the petitioner was
guilty of the misconduct and imposed the
punishment upon the petitioner. The
petitioner filed an appeal against the said
order. The Appellate Authority after
noticing the factual position concluded
that the documents produced during the
enquiry amply prove that the petitioner
did not belong to Scheduled Tribe as
wrongly declared by him for the purposes
of seeking appointment in the Bank and
thus
the
very
appointment
of
the
petitioner
was
on
the
basis
of
misrepresentation of facts.

4. We have heard learned counsel
for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Singhal
learned
counsel
appearing
for
the
respondent Bank and have perused the
materials available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the certificate issued by the
Member of Parliament was valid and it
was on the basis of this certificate that
appointment had been given to him. He
contended that in such a situation it was
not open to the respondent Bank to
impose the punishment subsequently on
the basis that he did not belong to the
Scheduled Tribe Category. He also
submitted that the District Magistrate,
Meerut had wrongly cancelled the earlier
certificate
declaring
him
to
be
a
Scheduled Tribe Category and that the
enquiry stood vitiated as he had not been
given opportunity to cross-examine the
witnesses produced on behalf of the Bank.
Learned counsel for the Bank, however,
submitted that as the petitioner had
wrongly obtained appointment on the
basis that he belonged to ST Category, the
Bank was justified in imposing the
punishment; that the District Magistrate,
Meerut
committed
no
illegality
in
cancelling the earlier certificate on the
basis of enquiry and that as the petitioner
himself had specifically in his application
before the Disciplinary Authority stated
that he would not cross-examine the
witnesses of the Bank it was not open to
him to now raise any grievance about the
same.

5. We find from the records that the
Enquiry
Officer
had
given
ample
opportunity
to
the
petitioner
to
substantiate his claim that he belonged to
Scheduled
Tribe
Category.
The
certificates submitted by the petitioner
were not found to be valid after enquiry
by the Authorities which had issued the
certificates.
The
District
Magistrate,
Garhwal to which place the petitioner
belonged, on the other hand, had issued
the certificate that the petitioner belonged
1 All] B.S. Negi V. G.M., Syndicate Bank and others
95
to Sawarna Hindu Rajpoot Jati which is
not a Scheduled Tribe or Backward Caste.
In such circumstances, in the face of the
findings which has been recorded on the
basis of the material available on the
record, particularly when the learned
counsel for the petitioner has not been
able to substantiate any infirmity in the
findings, we see no good reason to
interfere with the punishment order
imposed by the Disciplinary Authority or
the appellate order rejecting the appeal
filed by the petitioner.

6. The Tehsildar, Meerut, in our
opinion, was not the Competent Authority
to issue the certificate as the petitioner
belonged to Garhwal area and not Meerut.
In such circumstances, there is no
infirmity in the order of the District
Magistrate,
Meerut
cancelling
the
certificate
issued
by
the
Tehsildar,
Meerut. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has
time and again considered the validity of
appointments secured by filing forged
caste certificates.

In Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Addl.
Commr., Tribal Development (1994) 6
SCC 241, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
pointed out the object for granting certain
benefits
to
persons
belonging
to
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
and the approach to be adopted in matters
where benefits are fraudulently obtained
was highlighted. In paragraph 13 of the
judgment it was, inter alia, noted as
follows:-

"13. The admission wrongly gained
or appointment wrongly obtained on the
basis of false social status certificate
necessarily has the effect of depriving the
genuine Scheduled Castes or Scheduled
Tribes or OBC candidates as enjoined in
the Constitution of the benefits conferred
on them by the Constitution. The genuine
candidates are also denied admission to
educational institutions or appointments
to office or posts under a State for want of
social status certificate. The ineligible or
spurious persons who falsely gained entry
resort to dilatory tactics and create hurdles
in completion of the inquiries by the
Scrutiny Committee. It is true that the
applications for admission to educational
institutions are generally made by a
parent, since on that date many a time the
student may be a minor. It is the parent or
the guardian who may play fraud claiming
false status certificate. It is, therefore,
necessary that the certificates issued are
scrutinised at the earliest and with utmost
expedition and promptitude. For that
purpose, it is necessary to streamline the
procedure for the issuance of social status
certificates, their scrutiny and their
approval, which may be the following:

1. The application for grant of social
status certificate shall be made to the
Revenue
Sub-Divisional
Officer
and
Deputy
Collector
or
Deputy
Commissioner and the certificate shall be
issued by such officer rather than at the
Officer, Taluk or Mandal level.
2. The parent, guardian or the
candidate, as the case may be, shall file
an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a
competent
gazetted
officer
or
nongazetted officer with particulars of castes
and sub-castes, tribe, tribal community,
parts or groups of tribes or tribal
communities, the place from which he
originally
hails
from
and
other
particulars as may be prescribed by the
Directorate concerned.
3. Application for verification of the
caste
certificate
by
the
Scrutiny
Committee shall be filed at least six
96 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
months
in
advance
before
seeking
admission into educational institution or
an appointment to a post.
4. All the State Governments shall
constitute a Committee of three officers,
namely, (I) an Additional or Joint
Secretary or any officer higher in rank of
the Director of the department concerned,
(II) the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal
Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the
case may be, and (III) in the case of
Scheduled Castes another officer who has
intimate knowledge in the verification and
issuance of the social status certificates.
In the case of the Scheduled Tribes, the
Research Officer who has intimate
knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal
communities, parts of or groups of tribes
or tribal communities.
5. Each Directorate should constitute
a vigilance cell consisting of Senior
Deputy Superintendent of Police in overall charge and such number of Police
Inspectors to investigate into the social
status claims. The Inspector would go to
the local place of residence and original
place from which the candidate hails and
usually resides or in case of migration to
the town or city, the place from which he
originally hailed from. The vigilance
officer should personally verify and
collect all the facts of the social status
claimed by the candidate or the parent or
guardian, as the case may be. He should
also examine the school records, birth
registration, if any. He should also
examine the parent, guardian or the
candidate in relation to their caste etc. or
such other persons who have knowledge
of the social status of the candidate and
then submit a report to the Directorate
together with all particulars as envisaged
in the pro forma, in particular, of the
Scheduled
Tribes
relating
to
their
peculiar
anthropological
and
ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs,
mode of marriage, death ceremonies,
method of burial of dead bodies etc. by
the castes or tribes or tribal communities
concerned etc.
6. The Director concerned, on
receipt of the report from the vigilance
officer if he found the claim for social
status to be ''not genuine' or ''doubtful' or
spurious or falsely or wrongly claimed,
the Director concerned should issue
show-cause notice supplying a copy of the
report of the vigilance officer to the
candidate
by
registered
post
with
acknowledgment due or through the head
of the educational institution concerned in
which the candidate is studying or
employed. The notice should indicate that
the representation or reply, if any, would
be made within two weeks from the date
of the receipt of the notice and in no case
on request not more than 30 days from the
date of the receipt of the notice. In case,
the candidate seeks for an opportunity of
hearing and claims an inquiry to be made
in that behalf, the Director on receipt of
such representation/reply shall convene
the committee and the Joint/Additional
Secretary as Chairperson who shall give
reasonable
opportunity
to
the
candidate/parent/guardian to adduce all
evidence in support of their claim. A
public notice by beat of drum or any other
convenient mode may be published in the
village or locality and if any person or
association opposes such a claim, an
opportunity to adduce evidence may be
given to him/it. After giving such
opportunity either in person or through
counsel, the Committee may make such
inquiry as it deems expedient and
consider
the
claims
vis-Ã-vis
the
objections raised by the candidate or
opponent and pass an appropriate order
with brief reasons in support thereof.
1 All] B.S. Negi V. G.M., Syndicate Bank and others
97
7. In case the report is in favour of
the candidate and found to be genuine
and true, no further action need be taken
except where the report or the particulars
given are procured or found to be false or
fraudulently obtained and in the latter
event the same procedure as is envisaged
in para 6 be followed.
8. Notice contemplated in para 6
should be issued to the parents/guardian
also in case candidate is minor to appear
before the Committee with all evidence in
his or their support of the claim for the
social status certificates.
9. The inquiry should be completed
as expeditiously as possible preferably by
day-to-day
proceedings
within
such
period not exceeding two months. If after
inquiry, the Caste Scrutiny Committee
finds the claim to be false or spurious,
they should pass an order cancelling the
certificate issued and confiscate the same.
It should communicate within one month
from the date of the conclusion of the
proceedings the result of enquiry to the
parent/guardian and the applicant.
10. In case of any delay in finalizing
the proceedings, and in the meanwhile the
last
date
for
admission
into
an
educational institution or appointment to
an officer post, is getting expired, the
candidate be admitted by the Principal or
such other authority competent in that
behalf or appointed on the basis of the
social status certificate already issued or
an
affidavit
duly
sworn
by
the
parent/guardian candidate before the
competent officer or non-official and such
admission or appointment should be only
provisional, subject to the result of the
inquiry by the Scrutiny Committee.
11. The order passed by the
Committee shall be final and conclusive
only subject to the proceedings under
Article 226 of the Constitution.
12. No suit or other proceedings
before any other authority should lie.
13. The High Court would dispose of
these cases as expeditiously as possible
within a period of three months. In case,
as
per
its
procedure,
the
writ
petition/miscellaneous petition/matter is
disposed of by a Single Judge, then no
further appeal would lie against that
order to the Division Bench but subject to
special leave under Article 136.
14. In case, the certificate obtained
or social status claimed is found to be
false, the parent/guardian/the candidate
should be prosecuted for making false
claim. If the prosecution ends in a
conviction and sentence of the accused, it
could be regarded as an offence involving
moral
turpitude,
disqualification
for
elective posts or offices under the State or
the Union or elections to any local body,
legislature or Parliament.
15. As soon as the finding is
recorded by the Scrutiny Committee
holding that the certificate obtained was
false, on its cancellation and confiscation
simultaneously,
it
should
be
communicated
to
the
educational
institution concerned or the appointing
authority
by
registered
post
with
acknowledgment due with a request to
cancel the admission or the appointment.
The Principal etc. of the educational
institution responsible for making the
admission or the appointing authority,
should cancel the admission/appointment
without
any
further
notice
to
the
candidate and debar the candidate from
further study or continue in office in a
post."

7. In the case of R. Vishwanatha
Pillai Vs. State of Kerala & Ors,. (2004)
2 SCC 105, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
observed as follows:-
98 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
"This apart, the appellant obtained
the appointment in the service on the
basis that he belonged to a Scheduled
Caste community. When it was found by
the Scrutiny Committee that he did not
belong
to
the
Scheduled
Caste
community, then the very basis of his
appointment
was
taken
away.
His
appointment was no appointment in the
eye of law. He cannot claim a right to the
post as he had usurped the post meant
for a reserved candidate by playing a
fraud and producing a false caste
certificate."
.............................

The rights to salary, pension and
other
service
benefits
are
entirely
statutory in nature in public service. The
appellant
obtained
the
appointment
against a post meant for a reserved
candidate by producing a false caste
certificate and by playing a fraud. His
appointment to the post was void and non
est in the eye of the law. The right to
salary or pension after retirement flows
from a valid and legal appointment. The
consequential right of pension and
monetary benefits can be given only if the
appointment was valid and legal. Such
benefits cannot be given in a case where
the appointment was found to have been
obtained fraudulently and rested on a
false caste certificate. A person who
entered the service by producing a false
caste
certificate
and
obtained
appointment for the post meant for a
Scheduled Caste, thus depriving a
genuine Scheduled Caste candidate of
appointment to that post, does not
deserve any sympathy or indulgence of
this Court. A person who seeks equity
must come with clean hands. He, who
comes to the court with false claims,
cannot plead equity nor would the court
be justified to exercise equity jurisdiction
in his favour. A person who seeks equity
must act in a fair and equitable manner.
Equity jurisdiction cannot be exercised in
the case of a person who got the
appointment on the basis of a false caste
certificate by playing a fraud. No
sympathy and equitable consideration can
come to his rescue. We are of the view
that equity or compassion cannot be
allowed to bend the arms of law in a case
where an individual acquired a status by
practicing fraud." (Emphasis supplied)

8. In Bank of India & Anr. Vs.
Avinash D. Mandivikar & Ors,. (2005) 7
SCC 690 the Hon'ble Supreme Court
again considered the consequences of
filing a false certificate for seeking
appointment and in this connection it was
observed as follows:-

"Respondent 1 employee obtained
appointment in the service on the basis
that he belonged to a Scheduled Tribe.
When the clear finding of the Scrutiny
Committee is that he did not belong to
the Scheduled Tribe, the very foundation
of his appointment collapses and his
appointment is no appointment in the eye
of law. There is absolutely no justification
for his claim in respect of the post he
usurped, as the same was meant for a
reserved candidate.
......................
The matter can be looked into from
another angle. When fraud is perpetrated
the parameters of consideration will be
different. Fraud and collusion vitiate even
the most solemn proceedings in any
civilised system of jurisprudence. This
Court in Bhaurao Dagdu Paralkar v.
State of Maharashtra (2005) 7 SCC 605
dealt with the effect of fraud. It was held
as follows in the said judgment:-
1 All] B.S. Negi V. G.M., Syndicate Bank and others
99
"12[14]. ... ''Fraud is proved when it
is shown that a false representation has
been made (i) knowingly, or (ii) without
belief in its truth, or (iii) recklessly,
careless whether it be true or false.'
*

*

*
13[15]. This aspect of the matter has
been considered by this Court in Roshan
Deen v. Preeti Lal (2002) 1 SCC 100,
Ram Preeti Yadav v. U.P. Board of High
School
and
Intermediate
Education
(2003) 8 SCC 311, Ram Chandra Singh
case (2003) 8 SCC 319 and Ashok
Leyland Ltd. v. State of T.N. (2004) 3 SCC
1.

14[16]. Suppression of a material
document would also amount to a fraud
on the court. (See Gowrishankar v. Joshi
Amba Shankar Family Trust (1996) 3
SCC 310 and S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu
v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1).

15[17]. ''Fraud is a conduct either
by letter or words, which induces the
other person or authority to take a
definite determinative stand as a response
to the conduct of the former either by
words or letter. Although negligence is
not fraud but it can be evidence on fraud;
as observed in Ram Preeti Yadav case.

16[18]. In Lazarus Estates Ltd. v.
Beasley (1956) 1 QB 702 Lord Denning
observed at QB pp. 712 and 713: (All ER
p.345-C)

"No judgment of a court, no order of
a minister, can be allowed to stand if it
has been obtained by fraud. Fraud
unravels everything.'

In the same judgment Lord Parker, L.J.
observed
that
fraud
vitiates
all
transactions known to the law of however
high a degree of solemnity. (p. 722)

[19].
These
aspects
were
recently
highlighted in State of A.P. v. T.
Suryachandra Rao (2005) 6 SCC 149."
(Emphasis supplied)

9. The same view was reiterated by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Lillykutty Vs. Scrutiny Committee, SC &
ST & Ors. (2005) 8 SCC 283 and it was
observed :-

"When, thus, a person who is not a
member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe obtains a false certificate
with a view to gain undue advantage to
which he or she was not otherwise
entitled to, would amount to commission
of fraud. Fraudulent acts are not
encouraged by the courts.

.........Any action by the authorities or by
the people claiming a right privilege
under the Constitution which subverts the
constitutional purpose must be treated as
a
fraud
on
the
Constitution.
The
Constitution
does
not
postulate
conferment of any special benefit on those
who do not belong to the category of
people for whom the provision was
made."

10. From the aforesaid decisions of
the Supreme Court it is clear that where it
is found that the petitioner does not
belong to the caste indicated by him while
seeking appointment then the very basis
of his appointment is taken away and such
appointment is no appointment in the eye
of law and such a person also does not
deserve any sympathy and indulgence of
the Courts.
100 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
11. In view of the proposition of law
laid down by the Supreme Court in the
aforesaid decisions, we are of the opinion
that
the
very
foundation
of
the
appointment of the petitioner was void
and
non-est
and,
therefore,
the
Disciplinary Authority was justified in
imposing the punishment.

12. Learned counsel for the
petitioner
then
submitted
that
the
petitioner was not given any opportunity
to cross examine the witnesses produced
on behalf of the Bank. We are not
inclined to accept this contention. In the
first instance, as the petitioner earlier
remained absent during the enquiry it was
held ex-parte. The petitioner, however,
submitted a representation before the
Disciplinary Authority with the clear
stipulation that he would not crossexamine the witnesses already examined
by the Bank. The petitioner, therefore,
waived his right to cross-examine the
witnesses. We further find that the
Enquiry Officer has also recorded a
categorical finding that even after the
matter was reopened at the instance of the
Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner did
not express any desire to cross examine
the Management witnesses. In such
circumstances the contention of the
learned counsel for the petitioner cannot
be accepted.

13. For all the reasons stated above,
there is no merit in this petition. It is,
accordingly, dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 16.01.2006

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE A.P. SAHI, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2605 of 2006

Bhupendra Kumar Kushwaha ..Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri R.K. Pandey

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri P.D. Tripathi
S.C.

Constitution
of
India,
Act
226Compassionate Appointment-son of the
predeceased son-dependent of grand
father
entitled
for
compassionate
appointment-despite
of
repeated
directions-officer not cared even to have
a glance of judgment-practice adapted
by
the
officer
concern
heldreprehensible and deprecated-direction
issued to implement the judgment within
3 weeks.

Held: Para 8 & 9

The law, therefore, was settled by this
court that the son of a predeceased son,
who was dependent on his grand father
was
entitled
to
be
considered
for
compassionate appointment in the event
the grand father died in harness. There is
absolutely no ambiguity in the law laid
down by this court in the division Bench
judgment referred to herein above,
which is binding on me and was more
binding on the officer concerned, who
has passed this order.

The impunity with which the impugned
order was passed clearly indicates that
the officer concerned did not even care
to have a glance of the judgment of the