Service law – Dismissal from service – Fabrication of documents – Appellant-court attender remained absent from his duties, and subsequently produced handwritten medical certificate issued by a doctor – Doctor on verification denied having issued the medical certificate, though admitted that the appellant had approached him and received some tablets but he did not remember the date of treatment – Charges of misconduct proved in the disciplinary proceedings and the appellant was dismissed from service, later upheld in the departmental appeal – High Court also upheld the order of dismissal – Correctness:
Held: Parameters for judicial review against orders passed in disciplinary proceedings are limited – However, where the findings are based on no evidence a court of law perfectly justified in interfering with the orders in disciplinary proceedings – Having failed to verify the disputed and the undisputed signature, the finding of the Inquiry Officer that the medical certificate was not genuine, is perverse and based on no credible evidence – Signature on the Medical Certificate also not identical though broadly similar to what is in the acknowledgement and on the statement given by the doctor to the Presiding Judge – When nothing conclusive emerges one way or the other, prudence would dictate and common sense would command that the inquiry officer referred the matter to a handwriting expert, before recording a finding of fabrication and forgery – Failure to do so on facts, constrains to hold that the charge of forgery not been proved – Also there are many other inexplicable peculiarities in the case – Appellant was facing a grave charge of fabrication of the documents – When charges are grave, the caution and circumspection that should be exercised by the authorities should be greater – Charge in the present disciplinary inquiry, being not established, can have no bearing – Equally, the submission that the rules provided for a mandatory penalty of dismissal also does not require further consideration since the charges themselves have not been established – Impugned judgment of the High Court set aside – Order of dismissal and the order of the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeal set aside – Appellant to be reinstated in service forthwith with all consequential benefits. [Paras 36, 41, 43-45]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.