Allahabad High Court
ASHISH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The dismissal is upheld as the petitioner was afforded a proper opportunity to be heard through the show‑cause notice.
Summary
Ashish Kumar, appointed as a ward‑boy on compassionate grounds after his father's death, was alleged to have secured the post by submitting a false affidavit stating that no family member was employed in government service, despite his mother’s employment at a mental health hospital. The District Magistrate ordered an inquiry, leading to a show‑cause notice that offered Kumar a fifteen‑day period to submit an explanation and the option of a personal hearing. Kumar failed to respond to the notice, and the disciplinary authority dismissed him on 16‑01‑2014 for concealing material facts. Kumar filed a writ petition claiming he was denied a hearing. The High Court held that the show‑cause notice constituted a sufficient opportunity to be heard and that Kumar’s failure to avail it barred any interference. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as misconceived and without merit.
Issues considered
- Whether the dismissal of the petitioner without a personal hearing violates principles of natural justice.
- Whether the issuance of a show‑cause notice with an opportunity to submit an explanation satisfies the requirement of a hearing.
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- false affidavit
- disciplinary dismissal
- natural justice
- show‑cause notice
- Article 226
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 8446 of 2014
Ashish Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Adarsh Kumar, B.N. Rai, Manish
Pandey, Radhey Krishna Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C. S. C., Jyotsna Srivastava
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Brijesh Kumar Srivastava,
learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no.1 and perused the
record on Board.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 16.01.2014, whereby he has
been dismissed from the post of Ward-boy, Karmchari Rajya Bima
Chikitsalay, Agra (E.S.I. Hospital, Agra).
3. The solitary submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is
that the petitioner has been dismissed from service without affording him an
opportunity of hearing.
4. Perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner was appointed to the post
of Ward-boy (class-IV employee) at E.S.I. Hospital, Agra on compassionate
grounds consequent upon the death of his father (Roop Chandra), who died
in harness on 16.10.2010 while serving on the post of Dhobi (Washerman) at
E.S.I. Hospital, Agra. During the course of the petitioner's service, the
District Magistrate, Agra, vide letter dated 09.05.2013 bearing Letter No.153
/OSD, directed that an enquiry be conducted with respect to the
compassionate appointment of the present petitioner on the allegation that he
had secured job by furnishing a false affidavit regarding dependency, despite
the fact that his mother was already employed in Mental Health Hospital,
Agra. Pursuant to the aforesaid letter dated 09.05.2013, the Medical
Superintendent, E.S.I. Hospital, Agra, vide its letter dated 15.05.2013,
requested the Director, Mental Health Hospital, Agra, to submit a report with
respect to the employment details of Mamta Devi, w/o Late Roop Chandra
WRIA No. 8446 of 2014
2
(mother of the present petitioner), along with particulars of her family
members. Pursuant to the letter dated 15.05.2013, the Medical
Superintendent, Mental Health Hospital, Agra, submitted a report dated
18.05.2013 stating that Mamta Devi w/o. Late Roop Chandra had been
working as a Washer-Woman since 09.04.1992 and had four sons and one
daughter, all married. The record further reveals that while applying for
compassionate appointment, the present petitioner had furnished an affidavit,
along with his application, to the effect that no member of his family was
employed in any government or semi-government service. Likewise, Mamta
Devi w/o. Late Roop Chandra (mother of the present petitioner) also
submitted an affidavit in support of compassionate appointment of the
present petitioner by stating therein that her son may be accorded
compassionate appointment in place of her deceased husband and no
member of the family was employed in government or semi-government
service.
5. Pursuant to the report dated 18.05.2013 submitted by the Medical
Superintendent, Mental Health Hospital, Agra, a show-cause notice dated
01.11.2013 (Annexure No.2) was issued to the present petitioner to submit
his reply, which was served upon him on 14.11.2013. Under the aforesaid
notice, present petitioner was required to submit his explanation within
fifteen days. It was further provided in the said notice that, in case, the
petitioner desired a personal hearing, he could appear on any working day in
the Directorate to put forth his defence. It was clarified in the said show-
cause notice that, in case, the explanation submitted was found
unsatisfactory or same was not submitted within the stipulated period, it
would be presumed that the petitioner had nothing to say in his defence
against the charges levelled against him and, accordingly, appropriate
disciplinary proceeding would follow.
6. A specific finding has been recorded in the order impugned dated
16.01.2014 that despite service of the show cause notice, the present
petitioner failed to submit any explanation till the date passing of impugned
order. Relying upon the report dated 18.05.2013 submitted by the Medical
Superintendent, Mental Health Hospital, Agra, the disciplinary authority has
returned a finding that Ashish Kumar (present petitioner) and his mother,
namely, Mamta Devi w/o Late Roop Chandra had concealed the material
facts and furnished false affidavits to secure the compassionate appointment
for the present petitioner to the post of Ward-boy.
WRIA No. 8446 of 2014
3
7. The finding returned by the disciplinary authority with respect to the non-
submission of the explanation by the petitioner, despite the opportunity
having been afforded to him, has not been rebutted by the petitioner in the
writ petition. He has simply averred in the petition that no opportunity of
hearing afforded to him. In support of his submission, learned counsel for
the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Kamal Nayan Mishra vs. State of M.P., reported in
(2010) 2 SCC 169. The cited judgement is clearly distinguishable on facts
and is not applicable in the given facts and circumstances of the present case.
In the aforesaid cited case, no opportunity whatsoever had be afforded to the
delinquent employee before taking action against him for furnishing false
information at the time of submitting the application form. However, in the
present case, a specific show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and
opportunity was also granted to him to submit his explanation as well as to
avail personal hearing, but the petitioner failed to avail the same. Moreover,
the finding recorded by the disciplinary authority, while passing the
dismissal order dated 16.01.2014, with regard to concealment of the mother's
employment, and furnishing of false affidavit, and non-submission of
explanation on his part, have not been specifically rebutted in the instant writ
petition.
8. In this conspectus, as above, this court does not find any justifiable ground
to entertain the instant writ petition or interfere with the impugned order
passed by the disciplinary authority. The finding returned by the disciplinary
authority remain unrebutted by the petitioner in the instant writ petition and
are based upon material available on record. There is no illegality,
perversity, or infirmity in the order under challenge so as to warrant any
indulgence by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. As such, the instant writ petition, being misconceived and devoid of
merits, is dismissed with no order as to costs.
May 12, 2026
VR
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIBHA RATAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…