The Supreme Court gave a big decision for the employed people. The court said that if an employee gives wrong information while working for the company, then he can be sacked, that is, his job can be taken away from him.
During a recent hearing in the Supreme Court, it was said that an employee can be fired at any time, If he has given false information relating to his fitness which is likely to affect his eligibility or fitness for the post.
When did the Supreme Court give its verdict when two CRPF jawans were dismissed for giving wrong information about their fitness. Along with this, the Supreme Court also gave this decision to increase the transparency of recruitment in the police force. This was narrated by the bench of Justice Suryakant and Justice JB Pardiwala during the hearing.
While hearing the bench of Justice Suryakant and Justice JB Pardiwala, it was said that if in any case the worker has told the right things in the finished criminal case, even after that the employer can consider appointing the worker. With this, he will not be forced to appoint the candidate.
Along with this, it was also said from the side of the court that the purpose of the information given by the worker regarding the information mentioned in the verification letter is to evaluate his character and background for the purpose of his continuity in employment and service.
Along with this, this bench said that a public employer is required to thoroughly investigate each case through its designated officers in the recruitment of police forces.
After acquittal in criminal cases, you will not get the right of automatic appointment
According to PTI, the Supreme Court said that if a candidate is acquitted in a criminal case, he will not automatically get the right of appointment. Rather, the employer will still have the option to consider whether the concerned candidate is eligible for appointment to his post or not.
Along with this, it was also said by the court that concealment of material information and making false statements on questions relating to the offense clearly reflects the character, conduct and antecedents of an employee.
Investigation process should also be investigated
Justice Suryakant and Justice JB Pardiwala’s bench said during the hearing that the court must work to find out whether the authority whose action is being challenged acted wrongly or there was some bias in the decision of the authority. So it is not.
Along with this, it should also be seen whether the process of investigation adopted by the authority was fair and proper or not, it should also be investigated.
