AMIT KUMAR SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dtd. 15/2/2022 passed by learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur.

(2.) The facts of this case as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner are that he was given appointment on the post of LDC on compassionate grounds on 24/12/2012. Attestation form was filed on 1/7/2013, wherein under Clause-13 of the said form, he has disclosed all information, except Clause-13(J), wherein on account of paucity of space, he was not able to give details of criminal cases pending against him. On account of said concealment, show cause notice dtd. 11/12/2013 was issued, wherein it was reflected by the respondents that two criminal cases were found pending against the petitioner. Representation dtd. 10/10/2014 was filed, but rejected and termination order was passed vide order dtd. 18/3/2015. Against the same, application was filed by the petitioner before the Learned CAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. After considering the entire matter, the learned CAT vide order dtd. 15/2/2022 upheld the termination order holding that it was not against the Rules, that there is no allegation of mala-fides and natural justice was adhered to by the respondent. Being aggrieved against the same, present petition was filed.

(3.) Learned counsel on the above facts has submitted that the order passed by CAT is per se illegal in view of settled proposition of law. He has submitted that petitioner in question was merely tenth pass and he had disclosed necessary details as required under clause-13 of the form. It was only because paucity of space that due details only under clause-13(J) were not furnished. There was no wilful suppression of information, in fact it was a bonafide mistake because of lack of space.