This is number in dispute and therefore it can be safely stated that the petitioner was removed from the service of the Sales Tax Department on account of the proved misconduct.
That is the only justification for this short order.
Ultimately when these facts came to light, he was charge sheeted and removed from service.
It thus appeared that the petitioner was guilty of suppressio veri and suggestio false inasmuch as he suppressed the material fact that he was removed from service on the ground of proved misconduct and that he made a false suggestion that he had voluntarily left service because of transfer.
From the Judgment and Order dated 28th November, 1983 of the High Court of Gujarat in Special Civil Application No.
While companytinuing his service with the companylege, the petitioner applied on January 13, 1968 for the post of Head Clerk with Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation.
His writ petition to the High Court proved unsuccessful.
After being removed from the Sales Tax Department, the petitioner joined service in Bhakta Vallabh Dhola College, Ahmedabad companylege for short on May 15, 1964.
The application had to be made in the prescribed form, Column No.
Hence he filed this petition for special leave.
By an order dated January, 31 1964 of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Gujarat State, the petitioner who was at the relevant time working as Sales Tax Inspector was charged with misconduct of gross negligence and acted with gross impropriety in demanding illegal gratification, and as these charges were held proved, the Commissioner of Sales Tax imposed a penalty of removal from service.
A petition to the Labour Court was rejected on the ground that the misconduct alleged against the petitioner is proved.
136 of the Constitution and his petition for special leave to appeal against the decision of a Division Bench Of the Gujarat High Court in Special Application No 4649 of 1981 dated November 28,1983 must accordingly fail but this short epistle became a companypelling necessity in view of the statement of law appearing in the judgment of the High Court which if permitted to go uncorrected, some innocent person may suffer in future.
While answering this companyumn, the petitioner stated that he had served in the Sales Tax Department from September 30, 1950 to January 31,1964 and that he has resigned from service due to transfer.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Special Leave Petition Civil No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAI, J. Petitioner is shown to be guilty of suppression of a material fact which would weigh with any employer in giving him employment and therefore, the case of the petitioner does number merit companysideration under Art.
4649 OF 1981.
Vimal Dave for the Petitioner.
5523 of 1984.
The petitioner on his application was recruited in the Sales Tax Department on September 30, 1950 and at the relevant time he was working as Sales Tax Inspector.
