From your query it is not possible to know the complete facts of the case and in this situation it is difficult to clarify and advise you correctly. You are suggested to provide the complete facts.

Sir there cannot be no direct termination a disciplinary committee is appointed right of hearing is given to the person further then the penalty is imposed as per the rules the government employee is appointed.

You have suppressed material facts about your earlier employment

2) it is ground for termination

3) you can challenge your termination before administrative tribunal

You may challenge your termination in the High Court by filing writ petition making party to your company

If you have any valid ground only then you can move otherwise it is always in your favour that you stay back and accept this termination.

Please remember to rate the reply if you like it for improvement of our ratings.

Madras high court has held No doubt the petitioner's act of material suppression in giving particulars at the time of applying for the post of Police Constable is a matter of serious concern. However, the extreme punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the petitioner is excessive and is also disproportionate to the charges for the reason that the object and thrust behind awarding of punishment to an offender is only to mend him and not to strangulate him. Otherwise, the very purpose of awarding punishment would not be served. This aspect has to be taken note of by the parties while imposing the punishment. Therefore, I am not agreeable with the extreme punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the petitioner by the first respondent.

17. This court is conscious of the scope of interference in the quantum of punishment decided by the Disciplinary authority and the aggrieved cannot seek indulgence of this court in nullifying the act of the respondents. But, the matter can be re-looked into as per law, when the punishment imposed for the charges is shockingly disproportionate. In the case on hand, the punishment imposed on the petitioner is not proportionate to the charges levelled against him and the non-disclosure of particulars in the relevant format would attract serious punishment of dismissal, which has to be re-looked into.

3) your order for dismissal from service can be set aside by courts

Judgement is not binding on other high court but will be of persuasive value.

One need to pay training cost and as per time of agreement signed termination clause.

See. without knowing all the case details it is not proper to give reply to your so many questions.

There is o bar is summarily dismissing an employee and the same is permissible as well provided certain conditions are fulfilled which is well defined by catena of decisions of the supreme curt.

So of you provide us with all details then further assistance can be given.

1. The scope of a judicial challenge to termination is very narrow. You can challenge it if the principles of natural justice were not followed, or if the punishment is not commensurate with the proved charges.

2. Dhandapani is not the only precedent. There are thousands of such cases. Termination is a major penalty, hence if it is found to be in excess of the proven act then it can be quashed.

The doctrine of proportionality is a doctrine which is also also applicable to administrative law. Hence your case has merits. A person cannot be summarily dismissed and therefore a case should be filed.

Regards

Not at all unless and until something adverse is proved in the domestic enquiry without which termination is illegal as well as dis appropriate. Of course ruling of one high court may help in other high court but other high court is not bound to follow it.

Dear Client,

It is not a material suppression and the extreme punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the petitioner is excessive and is also disproportionate to the charges for the reason that the object and thrust behind awarding of punishment to an offender is only to mend him and not to strangulate him. Otherwise, the very purpose of awarding punishment would not be served.

Same is the ratio of Judgement,

Dismissal will be set aside by court.

Judgement not bound on other HCs, but they will take notice of it and can expect favorable order.

Sir you can contest the case but the thing on record is form where you failed to disclosed and suppressed the facts of previous employment so it will be difficult in the case,

You would not be dismissed from service but some disciplinary action would be taken against you

Ok than don't discuss more about it to any one in future and take experience certificate and resignation accepted acknowledgement plus relieving letter from previous govt job

Irrespective of the duration of the job if you were required to mention about previous employment then you ought to have mentioned it. It is a ground to initiate disciplinary proceedings against you, albeit the major penalty of dismissal cannot be imposed in factual scenario.

Yes.

A government organization can remove its employees only in two cases. The first case is an instance of proven misconduct. The other case is unnecessary absence from work without any notice.

There is no other way in which an employer can remove such employees. If he does so, a court can give the terminated employee his position back.

Government employees also sign employment contracts with their organization. Due to this, service conditions may differ from department to department. There is one thing that remains the same; job security and salary assurance.

Though the charge is proved,what are the chances of it being changed on the grounds of proportionality in courts?In R Dhandapani vs The Commissioner,Madras High Court has held the same.Will that case help in other high court?

a decision of the Supreme Court reported in 2006 (11) SCC 147 (Director, IOC and another vs. Santosh Kumar) "11. A perusal of the order passed by the Appellate Authority would only reveal the total non-application of mind by the Appellate Authority. We, therefore, have no other option except to set aside the order passed by the disciplinary authority and the Appellate Authority and remit the matter for fresh disposal to the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority shall consider the detailed representation made by the respondent and also consider the detailed report of the enquiry officer and the records placed before him in its proper perspective and decide the matter afresh on merits.

Does my case has merits-I was employed in a govt job for 3 months after interview of other.I resigned and joined another govt job.I didn't mention in it staff joining form due to short period of job.My resignation was accepted retrospectively.I was neither removed nor dismissed.

Since you have not been terminate or dismissed, even though you have suppressed the fact of your previous employment, since you have resigned the previous job and got relieving letter also, in my opinion you canot be held to have committed any criminal offence in this regard, you can challenge the charges of delinquency on the basis of merits and documentary evidences in your side.

You should take the plea that you have disclosed all material facts in attestaion form

There is no suppression of marerialfacts

on that ground you can contest that it is not wilful suppression it was mistake as you disclosed same in the attestation form but failed to disclose in the staff joining form.

As you have got salary from only one department so it is up to you not to give or give any information/details being relevant or irrelevant.So don't confuse and go ahead.

Since you have properly and legally resigned your previous employment at the time of joining this new employment, I think your worries on other issues are unnecessary.

In case you are asked for an explanation about this in future then you can very well say that you you have properly resigned from previous job and produce the relieving letter which should convince them

Sir you file a writ if there under your employment rules there is no alternate remedy of the administrative tribunal.

The court may take time.to hear out the case but you can seek interim relief pending the petition.

See all rules for that purpose for department and eplmployee has to be seen.

You have to file petition in CAT and not in HC

2) your 3 increments would be stopped

You can appeal to CAT or HC, once interim stay will grant , purpose will serve.

It may be hold of 1 increment ; 3 holds arbitrary.

Before going to Hon'ble High Court you should avail other remedies available such as Labour Department.

How can you file a writ petition and what is the reason that you may aproach high court for?

Do you want to say before high court that you have done this mistake hence kindly punish me or forgive me?

Do not stretch your imaginations to this extent by imagining such things out of your anxiety.

You may wait for the department to take any action after which you can think about taking legal steps to defend your interest.

Before that you may just wait and watch the situation patiently.

1) If the department is taking legal action than you apply for writ petition in the High Court.

Bench of the Supreme Court Avtar Singh vs. Union of India, has summarized the principles to be followed by Employers while dealing with issues related to suppression of information or submitting false information in the verification form by employees...

said judgment deals with suppression of information of criminal cases

Of course Avtar Singh citation has relevancy to this matter also but as you said that relates to suppression of facts related to criminal matters but one thing that Hon'ble SC has mentioned in this judgment also that before passing the stringent action order employer has to see the circumstances and if it has found that there are some special circumstances then action of dismissal or removing from service is not appropriate. So please read carefully and go ahead.

Avtar singh case relates supressing criminal record if any.

Civil information supression shall deal with more leniency.

Avtar singh has the Different issue it is on the suppression of facts and the criminal aspects. You engage an advocate he will prepare a petition and research on the subject

You may go through both the judgments fully and properly and then ascertain the facts and their relevancy to your case and decide if they can be utilised to your situation.