Constitution of India, Article 14 – Service Law – Verification form – Selection – Post of Constable – Non-disclosure of a criminal case – Cancellation of candidature – Certain special features that obtain in the case at hand – The appellant hails from the small village – On the date of the application, there was no criminal case pending and there was no suppression in the application form – The criminal case was registered when he was 21years of age for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 352 and 504 IPC and even in the criminal case he was acquitted – No doubt, the multiple columns in the verification affidavit, questions were asked from him indifferent permutations and combinations – He must have been in a deep dilemma as there was an imminent prospect of losing his employment – Verification report after noticing the criminal case and the subsequent acquittal stated that his character was good, that no complaints were found against him and that his general reputation was good – SHO who forwarded the report to the Superintendent of Police after reiterating the contents of the report observed that he was acquitted and no appeal was filed – Further, there was no other case pending and nor was any case registered against the candidate – SHO certified the character of the candidate as excellent and that he was eligible to do Government Service under the State Government – He annexed the report of the Police Station as well as the report of the Gram Pradhan and the Court documents – Superintendent of Police, in his letter to the Commandant, endorsed the report and reiterated that the character of the candidate was excellent – Order of cancellation does not even follow the mandate prescribed in Clause 4 of the Form of verification of character – Instead of considering whether the appellant was suitable for appointment, the Appointing Authority has mechanically held his selection was irregular and illegal because the appellant had furnished an affidavit with in correct facts –Held that the order of cancellation dated12.04.2005 is neither fair nor reasonable – Clause 9of the recruitment notification has to be read in the context of the law laid down in the cases set out- Nondisclosure of the unfortunate criminal case, (which too ended in acquittal) on the peculiar facts of the case, do not think it can be deemed fatal for the appellant – Impugned order of the learned Single Judge and the impugned order of the Division Bench liable to be set aside – The order of 12.04.2005 of the third respondent, Commandant 27th Battalion, PAC, Sitapur liable to be quashed and set aside – The respondents directed to appoint the appellant in service on the post of Constable for which he was selected, pursuant to his participation in reference to the Recruitment Notification dated 20.01.2004 -Appellant will not be entitled for the arrears of salary for the period during which he has not served the force – Appellant held entitled for all notional benefits, including pay, seniority and other consequential benefits. (Para 29 to 31)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2024 STPL(Web) 120 SC
[2024 INSC 131]
Ravindra Kumar Vs. State Of U.P. & Ors.
Civil appeal no. 5902 of 2012-Decided on 22-2-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024-STPLWeb-120-SC.pdf
