The single-judge bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that whenever any fraud is played, it vitiates the entire proceedings and if the principle of fraud can be squarely applied to the facts of the case then, the principles of natural justice have no application.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the notification was issued by the 3rd Respondent inviting application for the post of Anganwadi worker and the Petitioner applied for the same and got selected. Thereafter, when the Respondent got to know that the certificate was false, the show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner calling for an explanation for producing a fake and false certificate of 10th class. Furthermore, the explanation was submitted by the Petitioner, and the termination order was passed by the 3rd Respondent. Aggrieved by this, the writ petition was filed by the Petitioner and the proceedings were suspended. Later on, after filing the contempt case, the respondent authorities reinstated the petitioner as an Anganwadi worker and after some time, the Respondent again terminated the services of the Petitioner without issuing a show cause notice. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed.
Contentions of the Petitioner
The Petitioner contended that the Respondent didn’t issue the show cause notice before terminating the service of the Petitioner.
Contentions of the Respondent
The Respondent contended that the essential qualification was the 10th Class, the minimum age is 21 years and shall not be crossed the age of 35 years and the petitioner is below the minimum age limit at the time of notification. It was furthermore contended that the Petitioner submitted the fake 10th certificate and if fraud has been committed then, there is no requirement to issue a show cause notice.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that when fraud is committed, then it vitiates the entire proceedings and in the present case, the fraud has been committed by the Petitioner, therefore, the principles of natural justice have no application.
It was furthermore observed that the protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India is exclusive to government employees who have been duly appointed; an individual whose appointment is void is not a government official and, as such, is not eligible to claim it.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the view that the court has no reason to allow the Writ Petition.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court dismissed the Writ Petition.
Case Title: C.Eramma, Kurnool Dist. Vs Prl Secy Women Dev Child Welfare Dept 3 Ors and Others
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlada Rajashekhar Rao
Case No.: WRIT PETITION NO: 27307/2015
Advocate for the Petitioner: K SITA RAM
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
