MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Appointments made by fraud are null and void; they cannot be protected under law: Punjab & Haryana High Court

15 October 2024 6:55 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Punjab & Haryana High Court, in Avtar Singh & Anr. v. Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board, upheld the dismissal of two petitioners who were fraudulently appointed as Chowkidars in 2011. Justice Namit Kumar ruled that the appointments were made without following proper procedures, including advertisement in widely circulated newspapers, and were thus invalid. The Court emphasized that fraudulent appointments are a nullity under law and cannot be saved by principles of natural justice.

The petitioners, Avtar Singh and Ram Singh, were appointed as Chowkidars by the Market Committee, Barnala, based on a non-transparent process in 2011. The appointments were annulled in 2012 due to procedural irregularities. After a legal challenge, the High Court quashed the annulment for lack of a hearing but allowed the Board to conduct a fresh inquiry. Following the inquiry, the petitioners were dismissed in 2015 for obtaining their posts through fraud, leading to this petition.

The main issue was whether the petitioners could claim reinstatement despite their appointments being made fraudulently, violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, which ensure equal opportunity in public employment.

Justice Kumar ruled that the appointments violated basic principles of fair recruitment, as they were made without proper advertisement and only three candidates applied for the three available posts. The Court noted that the entire process was rigged by the then Chairman and Secretary of the Market Committee.

"Fraud vitiates everything; an appointment obtained by fraud is void ab initio."

The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the fraudulent appointments were unsustainable in law. The Court upheld the orders terminating the petitioners' services, emphasizing that fraud cannot be protected under the guise of legal or equitable rights.

 

Date of Decision: September 24, 2024

Avtar Singh & Anr. v. Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board

Latest Legal News