General Manager, Jal Kal Vibhag v. Counsel

Judgment

1. This is a batch of four intra-court appeals which involve similar questions of fact and law, hence, they were connected and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. Initially, intra-court appeal no. 246 of 2024 and 174 of 2024 were taken up by the Court on 21.07.2025. It was then informed that there are two other appeals involving the same questions and vide order dated

21.07.2025, the Court had required the learned counsel for the appellants to provide complete details of the similar pending appeals. It is in this background that all the four appeals were listed before this Court.

3. The record further reflects that intra-court appeal no. 174 of 2024 and 246 of 2024 were filed within time, however, intra-court appeal no. 819 of 2023 and 605 of 2023 were barred by limitation, by 97 days and 47 days respectively and they were filed along with an application seeking condonation of delay. 3 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

4. This Court before commencing the hearing in the appeals, took note of the grounds indicated in the application seeking condonation of delay, which was not seriously opposed by the respondents, hence, finding the grounds shown to be sufficient, the delay in the two abovementioned intra-court appeals bearing No. 819 of 2023 and 605 of 2023 was condoned. Consequently, the applications seeking condonation of delay shall stand allowed and all the four appeals will now be considered on merits.

5. The office shall allot a regular number to the aforesaid two intra- court appeals.

6. The Court now proceeds to consider the intra-court appeals on merits.

7. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the appellants shall be referred to as the ‘Department’ and the private respondent shall be referred to as the ‘Employee’.

8. The private respondents in all the four intra-court appeals are the employees of the Department and vide the impugned orders passed in their respective writ petitions, their appointments were cancelled by the Department on the premise that the employees had obtained the employment on the basis of a false ITI certificate. Being aggrieved by the said cancellation order, the employees assailed it by filing their respective writ petitions which were allowed by the learned Single Judge on different dates and being aggrieved from the said judgments, the Department have preferred these four intra-court appeals.

9. Certain facts which are employee specific are being mentioned hereinafter first:- (I) SPLA No.246/2024 (Gur Prasad) (i) The employee Gur Prasad had been working in the Department on daily wages since 17.12.1988. He was granted regular appointment w.e.f.

26.08.1996. The Department issued a show cause notice on 27.11.2017 calling upon Sri Gur Prasad to indicate as to why his employment may 4 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters not be cancelled as on a complaint, it was found that the ITI certificate furnished by the employee was a fake. (ii) Since Gur Prasad did not file an adequate response to disprove the fact that his ITI certificate was genuine, hence, his employment was cancelled on 06.09.2018. (iii) This was challenged by Sri Gur Prasad by filing Writ-A No. 5208 of 2024 which was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 27.08.2024 directing the Department to pay the retiral dues to the employee as he had attained the age of superannuation on

31.08.2018. This judgment and order dated 27.08.2024 is the subject matter of intra-court appeal no. 246 of 2024. (II) SPLA No.174/2024 (Raja Ram) (i) The employee Raja Ram had been working in the Department on daily wages since 23.07.1985. He was granted regular appointment w.e.f.

01.07.1989. The Department issued a show cause notice on 20.04.2017 calling upon Raja Ram to indicate as to why his employment may not be cancelled as on a complaint, it was found that the ITI certificate furnished by the employee was false. (ii) Since Raja Ram did not file an adequate response to disprove the fact that his ITI certificate was genuine, hence, his employment was cancelled on 20.09.2017. (iii) In the case of Raja Ram, he had first challenged the cancellation order dated 20.09.2017 by filing a petition before the State Services Tribunal which was allowed by the Tribunal on 12.01.2022. A direction was issued to hold an inquiry within a period of three months. Since the inquiry could not be completed, hence, the employee challenged the cancellation order in Writ-A No. 5364 of 2024 wherein the learned Single Judge passed an interim order dated 16.07.2024 staying the operation of the order dated 20.09.2017 by which the employment of the employee was cancelled and it also stayed the order dated 31.05.2024 by which the Department found that its cancellation order was appropriate. 5 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters The employee during the pendency of the proceedings had retired on

31.07.2019. (iv) This interim order passed by the learned Single Judge dated

16.07.2024 is the subject matter of challenge in intra-court Appeal No. 174 of 2024 on the premise that by means of an interim order, the learned Single Judge had practically allowed the petition. (III) SPLA No. 605 of 2024 (Ram Lakhan) (i) The employee Ram Lakhan had been working in the Department on daily wages since 13.07.1990. He was granted regular appointment w.e.f.

26.08.1996. The Department issued a show cause notice on 08.02.2018 as well as on 22.02.2018 calling upon Sri Ram Lakhan to indicate as to why his employment may not be cancelled as on a complaint, it was found that the ITI certificate furnished by the employee was a fake. (ii) Since Ram Lakhan did not file an adequate response to disprove the fact that his ITI certificate was genuine, hence, his employment was cancelled on 21.01.2019. SPLA No. 819 of 2023 (Ramadhar) (i) The employee-Ramadhar had been working in the Department on daily wages since 29.07.1988. He was granted regular appointment w.e.f.

08.07.1989. The Department issued a show cause notice on 19.12.2017 calling upon Sri Ramadhar to indicate as to why his employment may not be cancelled, as on a complaint, it was found that the ITI certificate furnished by the employee was a fake. (ii) Since Ramadhar did not file an adequate response to disprove the fact that his ITI certificate was genuine, hence, his employment was cancelled on 21.10.2018. The employee during the pendency of the proceedings had retired on 31.01.2020.

10. In all the four writ petitions filed by the employees, a two fold challenge was raised by the employee/writ petitioner, before the learned Single Judge, as under:- 6 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters (i) That the order of cancellation of appointment passed by the Department was based on an incorrect premise and no adequate opportunity was granted to the employee to put forward its case. The contention was that since the employees had been working since several decades, hence, at the fag end of their employment, the Department was not justified in cancelling the appointment in a summary manner merely on the basis of a show cause notice, rather a proper inquiry as contemplated under the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules,1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1999') should have been adopted. In absence of a proper inquiry, the cancellation order was not sustainable. Since some of the employees had already retired, hence, without complying with Article 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations, the inquiry could not have proceeded and on this count too the entire procedure for cancellation as adopted by the Department was bad; (ii) The other major ground was that the ITI Certificate was not an essential qualification and even if at all the said ITI Certificate was false yet it could not have any adverse impact on the employee, as for the purposes of working on the post of Sub Station Attendant, which was later re-designated as Pump Operator, the ITI Certificate was not required. Hence, on this count too, the order passed by the Department was bad.

11. The aforesaid contentions found favour with the learned Single Judge, as a consequence, the writ petitions were allowed and in the aforesaid backdrop, the four intra-court appeals were filed by the Department, assailing the said orders passed in favour of writ petitioners.

12. Sri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the Department in all the four intra-court appeals, has vehemently urged that all the writ-petitioners/employees furnished false ITI Certificates while taking the benefit of a higher Pay-Scale of 825-1200/- which was admissible only to such employees, who possessed a valid ITI Certificate. 7 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

13. It is submitted that on a complaint received, the ITI certificates of the writ petitioners were sent to the ITI, Kanpur for its verification. In response, the ITI, Kanpur informed that the said Certificates were false, as they had not been issued by the Institute. After having received the aforesaid verification report from the Institute, the Department issued show cause notices to the employee and after affording an opportunity to the employees to respond, who failed to substantiate that the certificate furnished by them was genuine, hence their employment was cancelled.

14. It was urged that where an appointment had been procured on the basis of a false certificate, it amounted to playing fraud with the Department and in such circumstances, it cannot be urged by the employee that the Department should hold a detailed inquiry as contemplated in the Rules of 1999.

15. Sri Shukla has urged that there is a distinction, where an employee is charged with misconduct while he is in service and in such circumstances the detailed inquiry in terms of the Rules of 1999 can be invoked. However, where the employment has been procured on the basis of false documents then this amounts to playing fraud and in such circumstances, the Department is not obliged to hold an inquiry in terms of Rules of 1999 as fraud unravels everything. In such circumstances, the employees were put to notice and after affording an opportunity of hearing including to show cause why their employment may not be terminated, the orders impugned were passed by the Department and it cannot be said that the said orders are bad for not holding a due inquiry as per the Rules of 1999.

16. Sri Shukla has further urged that the employees/the writ petitioners were governed by the relevant Government orders and it is not disputed by the employee that they were granted the pay-scale of 825-1200/- which was admissible only to such employees who had an ITI Certificate. Moreover, other employees of the Department who did not possess the ITI Certificates, were granted the pay-scale of 750-940/-. 8 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

17. It was urged that admittedly, the writ petitioners/employees throughout had been taking the benefit of the pay-scale of 825-1200/- (which was admissible to an ITI certificate holder), hence, they had all along enjoyed the higher pay-scale, which was not admissible to the writ-petitioners, had it not been for their forged ITI Certificates.

18. Sri Shukla further urged that none of the writ petitioners/employees could substantiate that the alleged ITI Certificates furnished by them at the time of obtaining employment were genuine. They also could not give any worthwhile explanation regarding the said forged certificates. This clearly indicated that they were filed by the employees with the objective to obtain a higher pay-scale, knowing well that the said employees were not eligible for it.

19. Sri Shukla further submitted that the view of the learned Single Judge in the case of Gur Prasad that if the Department found that the ITI Certificate was not genuine then such persons could be treated as persons not possessing the ITI Certificate and they could be paid the pay-scale of 750-940/- and any excess paid should have been re-adjusted rather than cancelling the appointments altogether and further that the Department could not establish whether the ITI Certificate was essential or it was merely a desirable qualification for the purposes of appointment on the post of Sub Station Attendant, was not justified and was contrary to records.

20. It was urged that for the post of Sub Station Attendant, there was a clear distinction between such Sub Station Attendant who had the ITI Certificates who were granted a higher pay-scale and the ones who did not possess such certificates were placed on a lower pay-scale.

21. This is clearly indicated that even while appointing the employees, this condition existed and in case if the said requirement was only ornamental then there was no reason for the employees to have furnished the said ITI Certificates while seeking the appointment and regularization on the said post with a higher pay-scale. 9 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

22. Sri Shukla, learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to certain Government orders to buttress his submissions that the distinction in the pay-scales were clearly referable to employees who possessed an ITI Certificates and the ones who did not. Even though, at a later stage the post of a Sub Station Attendant had been re-designated as Pump Operator but in terms of the subsequent Government Orders it clearly prescribed that henceforth no person would be employed on the post of Pump Operator who did not possess the requisite certificate from the ITI in the requisite trade for which employment was made.

23. In this light, it was urged that the employees could not be given the benefit of a higher pay-scale as they had consciously submitted false documents. In such circumstances, the Department was justified in putting the said employees to notice and despite having offered several opportunities to represent their case, they could not establish the genuinity of their ITI Certificates. Hence, where the employment was sought on the basis of fraud, the Department was not obliged to hold departmental proceedings under the Rules of 1999 and this aspect has not been considered by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has set aside the cancellation orders which is not in sound exercise of discretion or jurisdiction.

24. Sri Shukla has also pointed out that another employee Daan Bahadur had furnished a fraudulent ITI Certificate, his services too were cancelled by the Department. Sri Daan Bahadur assailed his cancellation before the learned Single Judge of this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 21476 (SS) of 2018 which came to be dismissed on 30.07.2018. His Special Appeal bearing No. 465 of 2018 (Daan Bahadur v. The General Manager, Jal Kal Vibhag, Lucknow and others) was also dismissed by a coordinate Bench of this Court by means of order dated 05.09.2018, hence, it is urged that the instant appeals deserve to be allowed and the writ petitions be dismissed.

25. Ms. Vishwamohini, learned counsel the writ petitioners/employees (respondents herein) has supported the order 10 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters impugned and has urged that no fraud was committed by the respondents. The requirement of an ITI Certificate was not essential under the Rules of 1963 and even otherwise there is a clear distinction between an ‘irregular appointment’ and an ‘illegal appointment’.

26. It was urged that since it was not compulsory to have an ITI Certificate for being appointed on the post of Sub Station Attendant and at best the only distinction was in respect of the pay-scale for such Sub Station Attendant who possessed the ITI Certificates and those who did not possess the said certificates. Mere difference in the pay-scale cannot be said to form a basis to allege that the employees were guilty of any fraud. This could only be termed as an irregular appointment and in such circumstances where the employees had already given their entire life to the Department, any change in the pay-scale, discovered at a later stage could have been rectified which necessarily could have led to re- adjustment of the post retiral benefits payable to the employees but the Department was not justified in cancelling the appointment, from inception.

27. This aspect was noticed by the Writ Court while allowing the writ petitions of the respective employees and in the given facts and circumstances, the discretion exercised by the writ court cannot be termed to be perverse which may require any interference from this Court in appeal.

28. The learned counsel for the respondents further urged that where the employment of the writ-petitioners was sought to be cancelled after having served for more than two decades, the employees were necessarily entitled to a proper inquiry in terms of the Rules of 1999. Admittedly, no charge sheet was served to the employees except in the case of Raja Ram (who had initially challenged his cancellation order before the Services Tribunal, as noted above), hence this was in clear violation of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and also violative of Regulations 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations, hence, the writ petitions were rightly allowed and the orders of the writ court are just 11 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters and proper and they do no require any interference, accordingly all the intra-court appeals deserve to be dismissed.

29. The learned counsel for the respondents-employees has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in Amar Kant Rai V. State of Bihar; 2015 (8) SCC 265 and State of Uttar Pradesh V. Ram Prakash Singh; 2025 INSC555.

30. The Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record.

31. The facts in between the parties are not much in dispute. Undisputedly, the service of all the employees/respondents/writ- petitioners was cancelled on a common ground that their ITI Certificates were not genuine and on the said basis they had been enjoying a higher pay-scale of 825-1200 which admittedly was admissible to such Sub Station Attendant who possessed a valid ITI Certificate.

32. It is also not disputed that all the writ petitioners had been served with a show cause notice while they were in active service. It is also not in dispute that apart from Ram Lakhan, the other three writ-petitioners had retired in August, 2018 (Gur Prasad), in July, 2019 (Raja Ram), In January, 2020 (Ramadhar). The writ petitions were filed only in the year 2023 and 2024 i.e. after more than 3 to 4 years from the retirement.

33. In the aforesaid backdrop, it will be appropriate to take note of certain facts indicated by the Department and apparently not contradicted or shown to be incorrect as a fact, by the respondent-writ petitioners.

34. Raja Ram and Ramadhar both were regularized on 01.07.1989 on a pay-scale of Rs. 315-440/-. It also not disputed that the aforesaid two employees were given a revised and upgraded pay-scale which was available only for such Sub Station Attendants who possessed an ITI Certificate on the date of their regular appointment i.e. 01.07.1989. 12 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

35. In so far as Gur Prasad and Ram Lakhan are concerned both of them were regularized on the post of Sub Station Attendants on

26.08.1996 and they were also given the Pay-scales which were applicable for Sub Station Attendants who possessed an ITI Certificate.

36. In pursuance of the Government Order dated 12.09.1995, the pay- scales as applicable was enhanced to Rs. 775-1025. Again as per the Government order dated 13.09.1995, the earlier order dated 12.09.1995 was modified to a limited extent that the pay-scale as admitted to a Pump Operator/Sub Station Attendant was modified to Rs. 825-1200/- who were possessing an ITI Certificate and pay-scale of Rs. 775-1025 was admissible to those who did not possess the ITI certificates.

37. From the aforesaid Government order, it is clear that such Sub Station Attendants (re-designated as Pump Operators) were bifurcated in two classes; (i) those possessing the ITI Certificates and (ii) those who did not possess such certificates.

38. Since the aforesaid two employees namely Rajaram and Ramadhar were given the pay-scale of Rs. 825-1200/- w.e.f. 01.07.1989 from the date of their joining. The necessary changes in their service book was already made and they were given the pay-scale which was not admissible to such employees who did not possess the said certificates.

39. Similarly, Ram Lakhan was confirmed on the post of Sub Station Attendant on 12.01.2015 and Gur Prasad was confirmed on 19.01.2015 and they too got the same pay-scales as applicable to Sub Station Attendants who possessed the ITI Certificates.

40. It is also relevant to notice that with passage of time and with the advent of the 5th Pay Commission, the pay-scales were enhanced. The pay-scale of Rs. 825-1200/- which was for the ITI Certificate holders was revised to 2750-4400/- and the pay-scale of Rs. 775-1025 which was for non-ITI Certificate holder was revised to 2610-3540 and similarly as per the 06th Pay Commission, the Pay Scale for ITI Certificate holders was enhanced to Rs. 5200-20200/- with a Grade Pay 13 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters of 1800/- whereas for the non-ITI Certificate holders, it was revised to Rs. 4400-7440/-with a Grade Pay of 1400/-.

41. The record also reflects that w.e.f. 17.10.2013, the qualification for the post of Pump Operators (which was earlier ITI Certificate holder) was modified and the qualification was made (High School with Science and two years ITI Certificate in Electrical and Tubewell Mechanic Trade). These Pump Operators were granted the pay-scales of Rs. 5200- 20200 with 1900/- Grade Pay in place of Grade Pay of 1800/- and this post was to be filled by direct recruitment.

42. The aforesaid two employees were given the pay-scales of 5200- 20200/- with Grade Pay of 1800/- which again was only admissible to ITI Certificate holders.

43. The Government orders as brought on record indicate the aforesaid fact and from perusal of Annexure No. 3 with the intra-court appeal No. 246 of 2024, it would indicate that the present writ- petitioners were given the pay-scales of 825-1200/- which was applicable to those having ITI Certificates. In so far as non-ITI Certificate holders are concerned, they were to receive the pay-scales of 775-1025/-.

44. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, in case if the ITI Certificate was not essentially to be furnished then admittedly the writ-petitioners could not have been granted the higher pay-scale of 825-1200/- as shall be evident from the Government Order dated 19.08.1996 which has been brought on record as Annexure No. 8 with the intra-court appeal no. 246 of 2024.

45. It is also not disputed that the writ-petitioners were enjoying the higher pay-scale and that was only possible if the writ-petitioners possessed the ITI Certificates. In such circumstances, it was but obvious that the said certificates were furnished by the writ-petitioners who were to get a higher pay-scale and they were the only beneficiary. 14 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

46. Thus, it cannot be said that the ITI was not an essential qualification for getting the higher pay-scale on the post of sub Station Attendant/Pump Operator. Prior to 2013, the qualification for the Pump Operator was differentiated on the basis of ITI Certificate, which permitted the holders of such certificates to get a higher pay-scale than those who did not possess the said certificate and would be entitled to lower pay-scale.

47. It is in the aforesaid backdrop where the writ-petitioners had taken the benefit of a higher pay-scale and had retired while prior to their retirement, this anomaly had come to light and they were served with the show cause notice and was afforded ample time to respond. Now, it cannot be denied by the writ-petitioners that they were not afforded adequate opportunity to respond to the said show cause notice and it also could not be disputed that the writ-petitioners did not have any answer to the fact that the ITI Certificates furnished by them were false and forged.

48. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is clear that furnishing of the said ITI Certificates by the writ-petitioners was for their personal gains and even though they were not ITI qualified yet knowingly they furnished the said certificates to get the benefit of a higher pay-scale from the Department.

49. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the writ petitioners had committed a misconduct rather the situation is that they procured their appointments on the post of Pump Operators with a higher pay- scale which was admissible only to an ITI Certificate holder on the basis of false ITI Certificates.

50. Now, let us examine whether the employment obtained by the employer was irregular or it had an element of fraud and illegality. It is not in dispute that the Department was not in any manner involved in granting a higher pay-scale to the employees without the requisite ITI Certificates nor the Department was aware that the ITI Certificates furnished were fake and yet the higher pay-scale was given. 15 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

51. What is fraud, has been noticed by the Apex Court in a large number of decisions and to illustrate it this Court takes the aid of the decision of the Apex Court in A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Government of A.P.: (2007) 4 SCC 221 and the relevant portion reads as under:- “21. Now, it is well-settled principle of law that if any judgment or order is obtained by fraud, it cannot be said to be a judgment or order in law. Before three centuries, Chief Justice Edward Coke proclaimed: “Fraud avoids all judicial acts, ecclesiastical or temporal.”

22. It is thus settled proposition of law that a judgment, decree or order obtained by playing fraud on the court, tribunal or authority is a nullity and non est in the eye of the law. Such a judgment, decree or order—by the first court or by the final court—has to be treated as nullity by every court, superior or inferior. It can be challenged in any court, at any time, in appeal, revision, writ or even in collateral proceedings.

23. In the leading case of Lazarus Estates Ltd. v. Beasley [(1956) 1 All ER 341] Lord Denning observed: (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.”

24. In Duchess of Kingstone, Smith's Leading Cases, 13th Edn., p. 644, explaining the nature of fraud, de Grey, C.J. stated that though a judgment would be res judicata and not impeachable from within, it might be impeachable from without. In other words, though it is not permissible to show that the court was “mistaken”, it might be shown that it was “misled”. There is an essential distinction between mistake and trickery. The clear implication of the distinction is that an action to set aside a judgment cannot be brought on the ground that it has been decided wrongly, namely, that on the merits, the decision was one which should not have been rendered, but it can be set aside, if the court was imposed upon or tricked into giving the judgment.

25. It has been said: fraud and justice never dwell together (fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant); or fraud and deceit ought to benefit none (fraus et dolus nemini patrocinari debent).

26. Fraud may be defined as an act of deliberate deception with the design of securing some unfair or undeserved benefit by taking undue advantage of another. In fraud one gains at the loss of another. Even most solemn proceedings stand vitiated if they are actuated by fraud. Fraud is thus an extrinsic collateral act which vitiates all judicial acts, whether in rem or in personam. The principle of “finality of litigation” cannot be stretched to the extent of an absurdity that it can be utilised as an engine of oppression by dishonest and fraudulent litigants. 16 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

27. In S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath [(1994) 1 SCC 1] this Court had an occasion to consider the doctrine of fraud and the effect thereof on the judgment obtained by a party. In that case, one A by a registered deed, relinquished all his rights in the suit property in favour of C who sold the property to B. Without disclosing that fact, A filed a suit for possession against B and obtained preliminary decree. During the pendency of an application for final decree, B came to know about the fact of release deed by A in favour of C. He, therefore, contended that the decree was obtained by playing fraud on the court and was a nullity. The trial court upheld the contention and dismissed the application. The High Court, however, set aside the order of the trial court, observing that “there is no legal duty cast upon the plaintiff to come to court with a true case and prove it by true evidence”. B approached this Court.

28. Allowing the appeal, setting aside the judgment of the High Court and describing the observations of the High Court as “wholly perverse”, Kuldip Singh, J. stated: (SCC p. 5, para 5) “The courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties. One who comes to the court, must come with clean hands. We are constrained to say that more often than not, process of the court is being abused. Property grabbers, tax- evaders, bank-loan-dodgers and other unscrupulous persons from all walks of life find the court process a convenient lever to retain the illegal gains indefinitely. We have no hesitation to say that a person, whose case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation.” (emphasis supplied)

29. The Court proceeded to state: (SCC p. 5, para 6) “A litigant, who approaches the court, is bound to produce all the documents executed by him which are relevant to the litigation. If he withholds a vital document in order to gain advantage on the other side then he would be guilty of playing fraud on the court as well as on the opposite party.”

30. The Court concluded: (SCC p. 5, para 5) “The principle of ‘finality of litigation’ cannot be pressed to the extent of such an absurdity that it becomes an engine of fraud in the hands of dishonest litigants."

52. Having noticed this aspect of the matter, it will now be appropriate to examine as to whether the said principles are applicable on service jurisprudence. In this regard, the decisions of the Apex Court in Union of India v. M. Bhaskaran:1995 Supp.(4) SCC 100, may be noticed and the relevant para reads as under:- "6. It is not necessary for us to express any opinion on the applicability of Rule 3(1)(i) and (iii) on the facts of the present cases for the simple reason that in our view the railway 17 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters employees concerned, respondents herein, have admittedly snatched employment in railway service, maybe of a casual nature, by relying upon forged or bogus casual labourer service cards. The unauthenticity of the service cards on the basis of which they got employment is clearly established on record of the departmental enquiry held against the employees concerned. Consequently, it has to be held that the respondents were guilty of misrepresentation and fraud perpetrated on the appellant- employer while getting employed in railway service and had snatched such employment which would not have been made available to them if they were not armed with such bogus and forged labourer service cards. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that for getting service in railway as casual labourers, it was strictly not necessary for the respondents to rely upon such casual service cards. If that was so there was no occasion for them to produce such bogus certificates/service cards for getting employed in railway service. Therefore, it is too late in the day for the respondents to submit that production of such bogus or forged service cards had not played its role in getting employed in railway service. It was clearly a case of fraud on the appellant-employer. If once such fraud is detected, the appointment orders themselves which were found to be tainted and vitiated by fraud and acts of cheating on the part of employees, were liable to be recalled and were at least voidable at the option of the employer concerned. This is precisely what has happened in the present case. Once the fraud of the respondents in getting such employment was detected, the respondents were proceeded against in departmental enquiries and were called upon to have their say and thereafter have been removed from service. Such orders of removal would amount to recalling of fraudulently obtained erroneous appointment orders which were avoided by the employer-appellant after following the due procedure of law and complying with the principles of natural justice. Therefore, even independently of Rule 3(1)(i) and (iii) of the Rules, such fraudulently obtained appointment orders could be legitimately treated as voidable at the option of the employer and could be recalled by the employer and in such cases merely because the respondent-employees have continued in service for a number of years on the basis of such fraudulently obtained employment orders cannot create any equity in their favour or any estoppel against the employer. In this connection we may usefully refer to a decision of this Court in Distt. Collector & Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi [(1990) 3 SCC 655 : 1990 SCC (L&S) 520 : (1990) 14 ATC 766] . In that case Sawant, J. speaking for this Court held that when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the concerned appointee. The aggrieved are all those who had similar or even better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement. It amounts to a fraud on public to appoint persons with inferior qualifications in 18 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters such circumstances unless it is clearly stated that the qualifications are relaxable. No court should be a party to the perpetuation of the fraudulent practice. It is of course true as noted by the Tribunal that the facts of the case in the aforesaid decision were different from the facts of the present case. And it is also true that in that case pending the service which was continued pursuant to the order of the Tribunal the candidate concerned acquired the requisite qualification and hence his appointment was not disturbed by this Court. But that is neither here nor there. As laid down in the aforesaid decision, if by committing fraud any employment is obtained, such a fraudulent practice cannot be permitted to be countenanced by a court of law. Consequently, it must be held that the Tribunal had committed a patent error of law in directing reinstatement of the respondent-workmen with all consequential benefits. The removal orders could not have been faulted by the Tribunal as they were the result of a sharp and fraudulent practice on the part of the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submitted that these illiterate respondents were employed as casual labourers years back in 1983 and subsequently they have been given temporary status and, therefore, after passage of such a long time they should not be thrown out of employment. It is difficult to agree with this contention. By mere passage of time a fraudulent practice would not get any sanctity. The appellant authorities having come to know about the fraud of the respondents in obtaining employment as casual labourers, started departmental proceedings years back in 1987 and these proceedings have dragged on for a number of years. Earlier, removal orders of the respondents were set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench and proceedings were remanded and after remand, fresh removal orders were passed by the appellant which have been set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench and which are the subject-matter of the present proceedings. Therefore, it cannot be said that the appellants are estopped from recalling such fraudulently obtained employment orders of the respondents subject of course to following due procedure of law and in due compliance with the principles of natural justice, on which aspect there is no dispute between the parties. If any lenient view is taken on the facts of the present case in favour of the respondents, then it would amount to putting premium on dishonesty and sharp practice which on the facts of the present cases cannot be permitted." (iv) The Apex Court in R. Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala; (2004) 2 SCC 105 in Paragraphs 15, 16 and 17 has held as under:-. "15. 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 19 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters was no appointment in the eye of the 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. Unless the appellant can lay a claim to the post on the basis of his appointment he cannot claim the constitutional guarantee given under Article 311 of the Constitution. As he had obtained the appointment on the basis of a false caste certificate he cannot be considered to be a person who holds a post within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. Finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee that the appellant got the appointment on the basis of a false caste certificate has become final. The position, therefore, is that the appellant has usurped the post which should have gone to a member of the Scheduled Castes. In view of the finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee and upheld up to this Court, he has disqualified himself to hold the post. The appointment was void from its inception. It cannot be said that the said void appointment would enable the appellant to claim that he was holding a civil post within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. As the appellant had obtained the appointment by playing a fraud, he cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own fraud in entering the service and claim that he was holder of the post entitled to be dealt with in terms of Article 311 of the Constitution of India or the Rules framed thereunder. Where an appointment in a service has been acquired by practising fraud or deceit, such an appointment is no appointment in law, in service and in such a situation Article 311 of the Constitution is not attracted at all.

16. In Ishwar Dayal Sah v. State of Bihar [1987 Lab IC 390 : 1987 BBCJ 48 (Pat)] the Division Bench of the Patna High Court examined the point as to whether a person who obtained the appointment on the basis of a false caste certificate was entitled to the protection of Article 311 of the Constitution. In the said case the employee had obtained appointment by producing a caste certificate that he belonged to a Scheduled Caste community which later on was found to be false. His appointment was cancelled. It was contended by the employee that the cancellation of his appointment amounted to removal from service within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution and was therefore void. It was contended that he could not be terminated from service without holding departmental inquiry as provided under the Rules. Dealing with the above contention, the High Court held that if the very appointment to the civil post is vitiated by fraud, forgery or crime or illegality, it would necessarily follow that no constitutional rights under Article 311 of the Constitution can possibly flow. It was held: "If the very appointment to civil post is vitiated by fraud, forgery or crime or illegality, it would necessarily follow that no constitutional rights under Article 311 can possibly flow from such a tainted force. In such a situation, the question is whether the person concerned is at all a civil servant of the Union or the State and if he is not validly so, then the issue remains outside the 20 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters purview of Article 311. If the very entry or the crossing of the threshold into the arena of the civil service of the State or the Union is put in issue and the door is barred against him, the cloak of protection under Article 311 is not attracted."

17. The point was again examined by a Full Bench of the Patna High Court in Rita Mishra v. Director, Primary Education, Bihar [AIR 1988 Pat 26 : 1988 Lab IC 907 : 1987 BBCJ 701 (FB)] . The question posed before the Full Bench was whether a public servant was entitled to payment of salary to him for the work done despite the fact that his letter of appointment was forged, fraudulent or illegal. The Full Bench held:

13. It is manifest from the above that the rights to salary, pension and other service benefits are entirely statutory in nature in public service. Therefore, these rights, including the right to salary, spring from a valid and legal appointment to the post. Once it is found that the very appointment is illegal and is non est in the eye of the law, no statutory entitlement for salary or consequential rights of pension and other monetary benefits can arise. In particular, if the very appointment is rested on forgery, no statutory right can flow from it."

53. This Court is also cognizant of a decision of this Bench in District Basic Education Officer v. Smt. Punita Singh: 2024 SCC OnLine All 8415 wherein this Court had countenanced such questions as to whether a person who has obtained an employment by fraud is required to be afforded an opportunity of going through the regular disciplinary proceedings or whether the service can be dispensed with by affording an opportunity of hearing. This Court while relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Union of India v. Prohlad Guha: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 317, held as under:- "19. Recently, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Prohlad Guha, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1865, in a case where the writ petitions filed by the employees were allowed for not following the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 and on coming to the conclusion that qua a person in regular service, the dismissal cannot take place sans any disciplinary inquiry, while setting aside the judgment, came to the following conclusion:

13. The impugned judgment is liable to be set aside on a further ground, since the requisite to establish eligibility for compassionate appointment was not properly fulfilled, they were appointed on the basis of false claims and fabricated documents. It then becomes imperative to discuss what constitutes fraud and 21 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters what is its impact on an act afflicted by such vice. R.M. Sahai, J. writing in Shrisht Dhawan (Smt.) v. Shaw Brothers observed— “20. Fraud and collusion vitiate even the most solemn proceedings in any civilised system of jurisprudence. It is a concept descriptive of human conduct. Michael Levi likens a fraudster to Milton's sorcerer, Comus, who exulted in his ability to, ‘wing me into the easy-hearted man and trap him into snares’. It has been defined as an act of trickery or deceit. In Webster's Third New International Dictionary fraud in equity has been defined as an act or omission to act or concealment by which one person obtains an advantage against conscience over another or which equity or public policy forbids as being prejudicial to another. In Black's Legal Dictionary, fraud is defined as an intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or surrender a legal right; a false representation of a matter of fact whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. In Concise Oxford Dictionary, it has been defined as criminal deception, use of false representation to gain unjust advantage; dishonest artifice or trick. According to Halsbury's Laws of England, a representation is deemed to have been false, and therefore a misrepresentation, if it was at the material date false in substance and in fact. …From dictionary meaning or even otherwise fraud arises out of deliberate active role of representator about a fact which he knows to be untrue yet he succeeds in misleading the representee by making him believe it to be true. The representation to become fraudulent must be of a fact with knowledge that it was false. The colour of fraud in public law or administrative law, as it is developing, is assuming different shades. It arises from a deception committed by disclosure of incorrect facts knowingly and deliberately to invoke exercise of power and procure an order from an authority or tribunal. It must result in exercise of jurisdiction which otherwise would not have been exercised. That is misrepresentation must be in relation to the conditions provided in a section on existence or non-existence of which power can be exercised.”

13.1 The words of Denning L.J. in Lazarus Estates Ltd. v. Beasley are of importance qua the impact of fraud. He wrote —“….. I cannot accede to this argument for a moment. No Court in this land will allow a person to keep an advantage he has obtained by fraud. 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. The Court is careful not to find fraud unless it is distinctly pleaded and proved; but once it is proved, it vitiates judgment, contract and all transactions whatsoever….” 22 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters

13.2 ‘Fraud’ is conduct expressed by letter or by word, inducing the other party to take a definite stand as a response to the conduct of the doer of such fraud. [See; Derry v. Peek; Ram Preeti Yadav v. U.P. Board of High School of Intermediate Education]

13.3 In R. Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala, a Bench of three learned Judges observed that a person who held a post which he had obtained by fraud, could not be said to be holding a post within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. In this case, a person who was not a member of Scheduled Castes, obtained a false certificate of belonging to such category and, as a result thereof, was appointed to a position in the Indian Police Service reserved for applicants from such category.

14. The above discussion reiterates that fraud vitiates all proceedings. Compassionate appointment is granted to those persons whose families are left deeply troubled or destitute by the primary breadwinner either having been incapacitated or having passed away. So when persons seeking appointment on such ground attempt to falsely establish their eligibility, as has been done in this case, such positions cannot be allowed to be retained. So far as the submission of non-compliance of the Rules is concerned, the judgment in Vishwanatha Pillai (supra) answers the question. The respondent-employees in the present case, having obtained their position by fraud, would not be considered to be holding a post for the purpose of the protections under the Constitution. We are supported in this conclusion by the observations made in Devendra Kumar v. State of Uttaranchal. In paragraph 25 thereof it was observed—“25. More so, if the initial action is not in consonance with law, the subsequent conduct of a party cannot sanctify the same. Sublato fundamento cadit opus — a foundation being removed, the superstructure falls. A person having done wrong cannot take advantage of his own wrong and plead bar of any law to frustrate the lawful trial by a competent court. In such a case the legal maxim nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria applies. The persons violating the law cannot be permitted to urge that their offence cannot be subjected to inquiry, trial or investigation. (Vide Union of India v. Major General Madan Lal Yadav [(1996) 4 SCC 127 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 592 : AIR 1996 SC 1340] and Lily Thomas v. Union of India [(2000) 6 SCC 224 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 1056].) Nor can a person claim any right arising out of his own wrongdoing (jus ex injuria non oritur).

15. The impugned judgment passed by the High Court, in view of the above discussion, is set aside and the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the Respondent-employees' Original Applications is restored. The Respondent employees were rightly dismissed from service by the Appellant-employer.....”

20. From the above, it is well established that in case, the employment has been obtained based on fraudulent documents, 23 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters the beneficiary of such fraud cannot seek that procedure prescribed under the Rules of 1999 must be followed."

54. Having taken note of the aforesaid decisions of the Apex Court and this Court, it is clear that in so far as the issue regarding false ITI Certificate is concerned, the Department had put the writ-petitioners to clear notice and despite the same, they could not justify or indicate that the said certificates were not forged. The employees could not dispute that they were not given adequate opportunity, hence, the requirement of adhering to the principles of natural justice has been established. It is also clear that the writ petitioners had obtained the employment and enjoyed the benefits of a higher pay-scale to which they were not entitled yet they availed the same only on the basis of the forged ITI Certificates.

55. This Court notices as a fact that Daan Bahadur, an employee of the Department in similar circumstances had unsuccessfully assailed his cancellation order before the Writ Court in a writ petition bearing W.P. No. 21476 (SS) of 2018 which was dismissed on 30.07.2018 and his Special Appeal bearing No. 465 of 2018 was also dismissed by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 05.09.2018.

56. In light of the aforesaid discussions, this Court finds that the Department had granted adequate opportunity to respond to the show cause notice issued to the employees. It is not case where principles of natural justice has not been adhered. Since there was an element of fraud in obtaining employment on a higher pay-scale and upon discovery the Department put the employees to notice and since they could not justify their fake certificates, hence, their employment was cancelled. In such circumstances, non-adherence to the Rules of 1999 was not arbitrary and the impugned orders passed by the learned Single Judge are not justifiable and are set aside.

57. For all the aforesaid reasons, all the four intra-court appeals bearing Appeal No. 246 of 2024, Special Appeal No. 174 of 2024, Special Appeal No. 605 of 2023 and Special Appeal No. 819 of 2023 are 24 SPLA No. 246 of 2024 alongwith connected matters allowed and the writ petitions bearing Writ-A No. 5208 of 2024, Writ-A No. 5364 of 2024, Writ-A No. 4054 of 2022 and Writ-A No. 3372 of 2022 shall stand dismissed. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (Jaspreet Singh,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) January 21, 2026 Asheesh