High CourtsDIVISION BENCH(2017) 04 PAT CK 0051

Surendra Kumar Gond Son of Late Basawan Sah Gond vs The Union of India

Patna High Court · Decided on 28 April 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Nilu Agrawal
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
1345 of 2014

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

32 paragraphs · 319 words
1.

Dismissal of the writ application by the learned single

Judge on 07.05.2014 is the cause of action for this appellant to move

in Letters Patent Appeal.

2.

The appellant was selected and appointed under Central

Reserve Police Force (CRPF) on the post of a constable. His

appointment was based on his declaration that he belonged to a

Scheduled Tribe and his selection was also made on the basis of such

a declaration. However, it seems, on verification this declaration was

found to be false and misleading on an enquiry made by the Sub

Divisional Magistrate and based on that input and report, the

Commandant, 147 Battalion, CRPF, Silchar, Assam, decided to

dismiss the appellant vide order dated 25.10.2007. This became the

reason for the appellant to file a writ application and seeking

quashing of the said order along with the order of the appellate

authority dated 29.04.2008. The learned single Judge went through

the entirety of the enquiry and the material which has been dealt in

detail and he came to a considered opinion that the caste certificate

was either forged or fake and the appellant did not belong to

Scheduled Tribe category, therefore, refused to interfere with the

order of dismissal.

3.

Since nothing new has emerged in this present appeal as

to the evidence, contrary to such finding of the authorities, which can

be said to be erroneous or can demolish the finding, the decision of

the respondent authorities to terminate his services for obtaining

employment by method foul, cannot be supported by any authority

much less a Court of law.

4.

After due examination of the order impugned and the

materials, we come to the finding that the learned single Judge has

committed no error in dismissing the writ application because the

appellant cannot be rewarded for a wrong committed by him and him

alone as he was the direct beneficiary.

5.

Appeal is dismissed.