Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited & Anr. v. Anil Kanwariya
Background
The respondent applied for a technical helper post and later submitted a declaration stating he had no pending criminal case and no conviction, but he had in fact already been convicted of a minor offence and had only been given probation benefits under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act. After he was appointed, a police verification report revealed the concealed conviction, and the employer terminated his service for suppressing material facts and filing a false declaration. The employee later (after appointment) obtained a further probation benefit (Section 12) from the Sessions Court that would have nullified the disqualification, and on that basis the High Court ordered his reinstatement.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the employee's conviction and the false declaration both existed at the time he applied and at the time he gave his declaration: the fact that he later obtained a more favourable probation order did not retroactively cure his suppression and false statement. Surveying a line of its own precedents on appointments obtained by concealment, the Court held that an employer is entitled to treat suppression of such information, however minor the underlying offence, as a matter of trust and may lawfully terminate the employee's services. The termination order was restored and the reinstatement orders of the Single Judge and Division Bench were set aside.
Lesson Learnt
When applying for a job, disclosing a pending case or past conviction honestly matters more than the outcome of that case, concealing it, or giving a false declaration, can justify termination even years later, regardless of any lenient order a court later grants in the criminal matter itself.