1. Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 11.1.2016, whereby he has been removed from the services of respondent bank. The order of removal has been passed on the ground that petitioner has suppressed his higher qualification and had knowingly suppressed relevant fact, which disentitled him to be retained in employment of the bank.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this petition are that an advertisement was issued by the respondent bank for the post of Housekeeper cum Peon, which required that candidate should be 10th standard pass, but should not have passed 12th standard. Petitioner pursuant to such advertisement made an application claiming that he has passed high school examination only and that he has not passed class 12th. An affidavit was also submitted by the petitioner on 15.10.2013 in this regard. It was later found that petitioner had passed 12th standard in the year 2012, but such higher qualification which was suppressed by him. Disciplinary proceedings, consequently, were initiated against the petitioner and charge sheet was served.
3. It was pleaded by the petitioner in disciplinary proceedings that he was in dire need of employment and various other difficulties were also pressed. The enquiry officer after considering the evidence brought on record returned a finding that petitioner had made false statement while applying for employment in the documents submitted. Punishment of removal from service was proposed. A notice dated 7.12.2015 was thereafter issued to the petitioner affording him an opportunity whereafter the order impugned has been passed. Aggrieved by the order dated 11.1.2016, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that possessing of higher qualification cannot be to any disadvantage of the bank and it is unfortunate that such qualification is being treated as a negative attribute of petitioner. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon decisions of the Apex Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Triven Sharan Mishra: (2014) 10 SCC 346 and Commissioner of Police and others vs. Sandeep Kumar: (2011) 4 SCC 644. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon a decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Ram Kumar vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce, delivered in C.M.W.P. No.20961 of 2014, dated 23.7.2015.
5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent bank stating that petitioner was aware about the qualification required to be possessed by a candidate, as it was clearly specified in the advertisement itself, but petitioner, knowing fully well that he was ineligible to apply, proceeded to make false disclosure and obtained employment contrary to the terms of a