Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ram Singh Gurjar vs State & Ors on 17 February, 2018
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4156 / 2012
Ram Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Sagar Mal, age 22 years, by caste
Gurjar, R/o V& P Shakambhari Sakrai, Via Gurara, Tehsil and
District Sirohi.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through the Inspector General of Police
(H.Q.), Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Inspector General of Police, Bikaner Range, Bikaner.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Sri Ganganagar.
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Naresh Singh for Mr. Rakesh Arora
For Respondent(s) :Ms. Shweta Bora
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order 17/02/2018
1. This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:
"1. It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs and by issuing an appropraite writ, order or direction the impugned order dated 13.04.2012 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondents may be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Constable (General) from the date similary situated persons have been given appointment with all consequential benefits.
Any other order favourable to the petitioner may also be passed."
(2 of 4) [CW-4156/2012]
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner shall be satisfied if the respondent re-consider the case in light of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (C) No.20525/2011 (Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. decided on 21.07.2016), in which following directions were given:
"30. We have noticed various decisions and tried to explain and reconcile them as far as possible. In view of aforesaid discussion, we summarize our conclusion thus:
(1) Information given to the employer by a candidate as to conviction, acquittal or arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information.
(2) While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information.
(3) The employer shall take into consideration the Government orders/instructions/rules, applicable to the employee, at the time of taking the decision.
(4) In case there is suppression or false information of involvement in a criminal case where conviction or acquittal had already been recorded before filling of the application/verification form and such fact later comes to knowledge of employer, any of the following recourse appropriate to the case may be adopted:-
(a) In a case trivial in nature in which conviction had been recorded, such as shouting slogans at young age or for a petty offence which if disclosed would not have rendered an incumbent unfit for post in question, the employer may, in its discretion, ignore such suppression of fact or false information by condoning the lapse.
(3 of 4) [CW-4156/2012]
(b) Where conviction has been recorded in case which is not trivial in nature, employer may cancel candidature or terminate services of the employee.
(c) If acquittal had already been recorded in a case involving moral turpitude or offence of heinous/serious nature, on technical ground and it is not a case of clean acquittal, or benefit of reasonable doubt has been given, the employer may consider all relevant facts available as to antecedents, and may take appropriate decision as to the continuance of the employee.
(5) In a case where the employee has made declaration truthfully of a concluded criminal case, the employer still has the right to consider antecedents, and cannot be compelled to appoint the candidate.
(6) In case when fact has been truthfully declared in character verification form regarding pendency of a criminal case of trivial nature, employer, in facts and circumstances of the case, in its discretion may appoint the candidate subject to decision of such case.
(7) In a case of deliberate suppression of fact with respect to multiple pending cases such false information by itself will assume significance and an employer may pass appropriate order cancelling candidature or terminating services as to the candidate at the time of filling the form, still it may have adverse impact and the appointing authority would take decision after considering the seriousness of the crime.
(8) If criminal case was pending but not known to the candidate at the time of filling the form, still it may have adverse impact and the appointing authority would take decision after considering the seriousness of the crime.
(9) In case the employee is confirmed in service, holding Departmental enquiry would be necessary before passing order of termination/removal or dismissal on the ground of suppression or submitting false information in verification form.
(10) For determining suppression or false information attestation/verification form has to be (4 of 4) [CW-4156/2012] specific, not vague. Only such information which was required to be specifically mentioned has to be disclosed. If information not asked for but is relevant comes to knowledge of the employer the same can be considered in an objective manner while addressing the question of fitness. However, in such case action cannot be taken on basis of suppression or submitting false information as to a fact which was not even asked for.
(11) Before a person is held guilty of suppressioveri or suggestio falsi, knowledge of the fact must be attributable to him."
6. Learned counsel for the respondent assures this Court that a fair consideration shall be made in light of the aforementioned precedent law.
7. In light of the aforementioned precedent law, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's case regarding the effect of criminal case while seeking appointment on the post of Constable (General) arising out of the advertisement dated 14.10.2010. The consideration shall be made within a period of 30 days from today and appropriate speaking order shall be passed by the respondents. The impugned order dated 13.04.2012 shall not come in the way of re-considering the case of the petitioner.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J. sudheer