Court rules appointments obtained through misrepresentation of marks as invalid, while allowing rectification for genuine errors
In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has upheld the termination of services of several Assistant Teachers in Uttar Pradesh who were found to have inflated their academic marks in application forms during the recruitment process. The Court, presided by Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan, J., ruled that the appointments obtained through such deliberate misrepresentation amounted to fraud and were void from the outset. The decision was made in response to writ petitions filed by Awadhesh Kumar Chaudhary and others, challenging the termination orders issued by the state authorities.
The recruitment process for the appointment of 69,000 Assistant Teachers was initiated in 2019, and the petitioners, having applied and later been selected, joined their services in 2021. However, discrepancies in the marks reported in their application forms led to the cancellation of their appointments in May 2025. The Court observed that misrepresentation of marks gave the candidates an undue advantage in the merit list, thereby compromising the fairness and integrity of the selection process.
The judgment emphasized that the principle of equity or estoppel could not be invoked to protect appointments obtained through deceit. It was highlighted that only candidates who had placed themselves in a disadvantageous position due to inadvertent errors could be considered for rectification. The Court cited various precedents from the Supreme Court and previous High Court judgments, reinforcing the stance that fraud vitiates all proceedings and appointments made on false representations are inherently invalid.
While the Court quashed the termination orders for a few candidates who had made bonafide errors and did not inflate their marks, it dismissed the petitions of those who had deliberately misrepresented their academic records. The decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding transparency and accountability in public employment.
Bottom Line:
Termination of appointments in public employment due to inflated marks in application forms - Deliberate misrepresentation of academic records, resulting in undue advantage and alteration of merit position, vitiates the appointment ab initio.
Statutory provision(s): U.P. Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973; U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999; relevant Government Orders and Circulars regarding recruitment and rectification processes.
Awadhesh Kumar Chaudhary v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2822437
