Suppression of pending criminal case in attestation form justified termination for material false declaration and unsuitability.

Suppression of a pending criminal case in an attestation form was treated as a material false declaration because disclosure is required to assess character, antecedents, and suitability for public employment. The fact that the criminal case was later withdrawn did not cure the falsity of the answer given on the date of the form. On that basis, the employer was entitled under the appointment conditions to treat the suppression as serious misconduct warranting termination, and the termination was upheld while the High Court's interference was found to be erroneous.

---

---

Issues: Whether suppression of the pendency of a criminal case in the attestation form justified termination of service, and whether the High Court was right in interfering with the Tribunal's order.

Analysis: The respondent had answered "No" to questions in the attestation form which required disclosure of whether he had ever been prosecuted or whether any criminal case was pending against him. At the time of filing the form, a criminal case was in fact pending, so the answer amounted to suppression of material information and a false statement. The disclosure was sought to verify character and antecedents and to assess suitability for public employment. Subsequent withdrawal of the criminal case, or the nature of the allegations, did not alter the falsity of the declaration made on the date of the form. The employer had discretion under the appointment conditions to treat such suppression as a serious misconduct warranting termination.

Conclusion: The termination was justified, and the High Court erred in setting aside the Tribunal's order.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the High Court's judgment was set aside, and the Tribunal's order upholding termination was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appointment form requires disclosure of pending criminal proceedings, deliberate suppression or a false denial of such material facts justifies termination because it directly affects assessment of character, antecedents, and suitability for service.

---