Allahabad High Court
Om Prakash Dubey vs State Of U.P. And Others on 27 September, 2012
Bench: Vineet Saran, Mushaffey Ahmad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 52503 of 2010
Petitioner :- Om Prakash Dubey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Manoj Kumar (Sharma)
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J.
Hon'ble Mushaffey Ahmad,J.
The petitioner has retired from service as Assistant Engineer on 31.12.2006 after serving for more than 32 years since 1974 in the department of local bodies of the State Government. After his retirement, with the intention of taking up contract work of the Government, the petitioner applied for grant of solvency as well as character certificates, which were duly granted by the district authorities of Allahabad and Gorakhpur. Thereafter, in the year 2009, the petitioner shifted to Ballia and applied for grant of character and solvency certificates with the District Magistrate, Ballia. When the same were not issued, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 30402 of 2010, which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.05.2010 with the direction to the District Magistrate, Ballia to consider the application of the petitioner for issuance of character and solvency certificates in accordance with law within a period of six weeks. Pursuant thereto, the impugned un-dated order of the District Magistrate, Ballia was served on the petitioner with the covering letter dated 23.07.2010. Aggrieved by the said order, this writ petition has been filed.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the record. Pleadings have been exchanged and with consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we are disposing of this writ petition at the admission stage.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that even though it was accepted that the Sub-Division Magistrate has on enquiry found that the petitioner has solvency for Rs.10,00,000/-, yet the application of the petitioner has been rejected because there was police report to the effect that there were two cases registered against the petitioner way back in the year 1968 and 1966. It is not disputed that in the first case, being Case Crime No. 40 of 1968, under sections 147, 148, 326, 324, 323, 307 IPC, the petitioner had been exonerated by the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 22.11.1971. In other case, which was registered as Case Crime No. 62 of 1966, under sections 147, 148, 323, 324 IPC, the matter was disposed of by order dated 30.03.1967 on the basis of compromise . It is merely on the basis of these two cases that the certificate has not been issued to the petitioner.
It is true that for issuance of character and solvency certificates, the report of the police authorities would be essential, but what has to be considered is as to whether the offences under which the petitioner is charged are of such nature because of which the certificates can be refused or not, and whether the petitioner has been convicted in the said criminal cases or not. Another important factor to be considered is whether the cases filed half a century back could be considered or not.
In the present case, the criminal cases against the petitioner are of virtually petty offences and in one case the petitioner has been exonerated and in the other the matter was compromised in the year 1971 and 1967. The said cases relate to the year 1968 and 1966 after which the petitioner joined services in 1974 and retired after 32 years in the year 2006. It is not a case of the respondent that during his service period there was any charge against the petitioner or any criminal case filed against him. As such, merely on the basis of the aforesaid two criminal cases against the petitioner filed way back in the year 1968 and 1966 in which he has not ever been found guilty, the District Magistrate has wrongly denied issuance of character and solvency certificates to the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the impugned order of the District Magistrate communicated to the petitioner vide covering letter dated 23.07.2010 deserves to be quashed.
Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. The impugned order passed by the District Magistrate is quashed. The District Magistrate, Ballia is directed to pass fresh orders with regard to issuance of the character certificate and solvency certificate to the petitioner in the light of the observations made here-in-above, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than six weeks from the date of filing of this order before the District Magistrate.
Order Date :- 27.9.2012
Sazia
( Mushaffey Ahmad, J ) ( Vineet Saran, J )
