After 26 Years of Unblemished Service Employment Terminated on Nationality Issue, SC Says Its “Illegal”

In the nationality issue case, the apex court said respondents admitted to inordinate delay occasioned to ascertain unsuitability of the appellant to the government service.

New Delhi:An unusual story, which created an upheaval in the life of a migrant from East Pakistan unfolded before the Supreme Court. A 16-year-old Basudev Dutta along with his father came to India from East Pakistan and his father was issued a migration certificate on May 19, 1969.

Dutta successfully completed Ophthalmic Assistant Course in 1984, and joined the public service on March 6, 1985, but the verification report was communicated by the police to the department on July 7, 2010, only two months prior to the date of retirement, on the ground that he was not citizen of the country. He was terminated. Dutta fought a draining legal battle and on December 5, the apex court said the order of termination passed against the appellant is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice and it cannot be sustained.

A bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and R Mahadevan said it appears that the appellant joined the post of Ophthalmic Assistant on March 6, 1985, upon production of satisfactory report of medical examination and police verification roll.

The bench said yet, the police verification report, which was supposed to have been filed within three months from the date of initial appointment of the appellant, was filed only in the year 2010, i.e., after 25 years of service and just two months prior to the date of his retirement. “Placing reliance on such a report, he was terminated from service. In view of the enormous delay on the part of the respondent authorities in submission of the verification report, the appellant has been rendered ineligible to receive his pensionary benefits, though he had put in 26 years of unblemished service”, said the bench.

The bench said respondents in their reply affidavit categorically admitted about the inordinate delay occasioned to ascertain the unsuitability of the appellant for appointment to the government service. “However, they did not assign any reason, much less a valid reason for the same. Such a callous and lackadaisical attitude on the part of the respondent authorities cannot be countenanced by us”, said the bench.

“The order of termination passed against the appellant is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice and it cannot be sustained”, added the bench.

The apex court directed police officials of all the state governments to check and verify documents pertaining to the character, antecedents, nationality, genuineness produced by the candidates selected for government jobs within six months from the date of their appointment.

The bench said appointments to government posts would have to be regularised only after verification of the credentials of the candidates.

"The given factual matrix would also compel this court to issue a direction to the police official(s) of all the states to complete the enquiry and file report as regards the character, antecedents, nationality, genuineness of the documents produced by the candidates selected for appointment to the government service, etc., within a stipulated time provided in the statute/GO, or in any event, not later than six months from the date of their appointment," said the bench

The bench said it is made clear that only upon verification of the credentials of the candidates, their appointments will have to be regularised so as to avoid further complications, as in the case on hand.

The apex court’s judgment came on a plea filed by Dutta challenging an order of the Calcutta High Court which set aside direction passed by the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal.

The bench said thus, in the ultimate analysis, we find that the Tribunal was right in observing that without following the principles of natural justice and without affording any opportunity to explain his case before the authority, the appellant was terminated and hence, his termination order cannot be sustained in the eye of law; and accordingly, set aside the order of termination.

“With the aforesaid observations and directions, this appeal is allowed and the order of the High Court is set aside. As a sequel, the service benefits which remain unpaid as on date, be paid to the appellant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment”, said the bench.