Public Employment Must Remain Free From Arbitrariness And Laxity; Punjab And Haryana High Court Dismisses Petition Of Lineman Terminated For Submitting Fake Certificates
The Court held that appointments secured through fraudulent certificates are void and confer no rights on the employee, underscoring that public employment opportunities must remain sacrosanct and untainted by arbitrariness or laxity
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a lineman challenging the termination of his services, after it was discovered that he had secured employment based on forged certificates, ruling that fraud vitiates every solemn act, and that no equity or estoppel can operate in favour of a candidate who enters service through deceit.
The Court was hearing a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking reinstatement, after the petitioner’s services were terminated by the employer following a verification report that found the certificates submitted at the time of appointment were fabricated.
A Bench comprising Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, while dismissing the petition, observed that “..public employment opportunities are both rare and highly coveted. Such employees represent the State at all levels, as such it carries with itself the assurance of stability and dignity. However, given its scarce nature, every such opportunity assumes great significance for aspirants who pursue it with commendable dedication and hope. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to ensure that the recruitment process remains sacrosanct, free from evils of arbitrariness and laxity.”
Advocate Bhim Sain Mittal appeared for the petitioner, while Additional Advocate General Piyush Khanna and Advocate Sanjeev Kaushik represented the respondent.
Background
The petitioner had been appointed as an Assistant Lineman in 2012 by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission. After serving for over a decade, his certificates were re-verified following a complaint. The principal of the concerned Industrial Training Institute reported that the petitioner’s certificate was not issued by the institute.
In light of this information, a show-cause notice was issued, and the petitioner’s services were terminated. Contending that his certificates had already been verified at the time of probation, and that the re-verification was prompted by unreliable sources, he approached the Punjab & Haryana High Court, arguing that his termination was illegal as it was ordered without a departmental enquiry.
Court’s Observation
The High Court held that the petitioner’s appointment, secured based on forged documents, was fraudulent from the outset and conferred no legal rights, reiterating that fraud vitiates everything and that no equity arises in favour of an employee who deceives the employer.
The Court invoked the legal maxims “nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria” (no man can take advantage of his own wrong) and “sublato fundamento cadit opus” (when the foundation is removed, the structure falls), highlighting that “an appointment secured by employing fraudulent means renders such recruitment void ab initio and therefore, such appointment would not confer any legal rights or entitlements on the petitioner.”
While dismissing the petition, the Bench further noted that the lapse was not one-sided. It was observed that the petitioner’s fraudulent certificates were not diligently verified during his probation, due to negligence on the part of the respondent Nigam’s officials.
This failure, the Bench observed, allowed the petitioner to remain in service for 10 years, drawing monetary benefits funded by taxpayers, and deprived genuine candidates of opportunities.
Consequently, the Court directed the Managing Director of the respondent Nigam to fix responsibility on the employees in charge of the verification process and take appropriate disciplinary action.
Conclusion
The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the appointment of the petitioner was void ab initio, and no rights flowed from fraudulent entry into service. The court further directed disciplinary action against negligent officials, ordering the MD of the Respondent Nigam to file a compliance report within eight weeks.
Cause Title: Kuldeep v. State of Haryana & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:PHHC:119921)
Appearances
Petitioner: Advocate Bhim Sain Mittal
Respondents: Addl. A.G. Haryana Piyush Khanna, Advocate Sanjeev Kaushik