New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed police officials of all the state governments to check and verify documents pertaining to the character, antecedents, nationality, and genuineness produced by the candidates selected for government jobs within six months from the date of their appointment.
In an order passed on December 5, a bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and R Mahadevan said appointments to government posts would have to be regularised only after verification of the credentials of the candidates.
The top court passed the direction while setting aside the termination of an ophthalmic assistant two months prior to the date of retirement.
The petitioner joined the public service on March 6, 1985, but the verification report was communicated by the police to the department only on July 7, 2010, only two months prior to the date of retirement on the ground that he was not a citizen of the country.
“The given factual matrix would also compel this court to issue a direction to the police official(s) of all the states to complete the enquiry and file report as regards the character, antecedents, nationality, genuineness of the documents produced by the candidates selected for appointment to the government service, etc., within a stipulated time provided in the statute/GO, or in any event, not later than six months from the date of their appointment,” the top court said.
The bench went on, “It is made clear that only upon verification of the credentials of the candidates, their appointments will have to be regularised so as to avoid further complications, as in the case on hand.”
The apex court was hearing a plea filed by Basudev Dutta challenging an order of the Kolkata High Court which set aside directions passed by the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal.
The petitioner challenged the termination order before the tribunal which while allowing his plea granted liberty to the authority concerned to proceed against the appellant in accordance with law.
The high court affirmed the order of termination passed by the authority concerned.
Referring to the case, the top court said it is manifestly clear that reasons were the heartbeat of every order and every notice must specify the grounds on which the administrative or quasi-judicial authority intended to proceed.
“In the light of the same, we have no hesitation to hold that the order of termination passed against the appellant is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice and it cannot be sustained,” it underlined. In its “ultimate analysis”, the top court found that the tribunal was right in observing that without following the principles of natural justice and without affording any opportunity to explain his case before it, the appellant was terminated.
“Hence, his termination order cannot be sustained in the eye of law; and accordingly, set aside the order of termination,” the bench held.
