Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. And 2 Others vs Dharmendra Kumar (Recruit ... on 11 January, 2021
Bench: Munishwar Nath Bhandari, Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 40
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 807 of 2020
Appellant :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Respondent :- Dharmendra Kumar (Recruit Constable Chest No. 424)
Counsel for Appellant :- Rama Nand Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- Satya Prakash Pandey
Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,J.
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
By this special appeal, a challenge was made to the judgment dated 18.06.2020, passed by learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by petitioner/non-appellant was allowed.
It is a case where writ petition was filed to challenge the order dated 07.04.2007, by which the petitioner/non-appellant, while on training after entering into police service, was discontinued.
The facts relevant to the case are that on the issuance of advertisement and recruitment process, the petitioner/non-appellant remain successful for appointment on the post of constable in U.P. Police. The petitioner/non-appellant was to be sent for training thus before that he was asked to submit certain declaration which includes an affidavit about criminal cases, if any, against him. It was filed on 10.06.2006, disclosing that no criminal case is pending against him, whereas an FIR under Section 325, 504 & 506 I.P.C. was registered bearing criminal case No.409 of 2005. The petitioner/non-appellant was subsequently acquitted in the said criminal case by the judgment dated 23.12.2006, passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. He was sent for training vide letter dated 08.01.2007. The said letter is quoted hereinunder for ready reference:-
^^izs"kd] ^^}kjk fo'ks"k [email protected]@iathd`r Mkd
iqfyl v/kh{kd
dUukSt
lsok esa
ofj"B iqfyl v/kh{kd
bVkok
i= la[;k% Hk&[email protected]&06 fnukad tuojh 08] 2007
fo"k;& fjdzwV vkj{kh ps0 ua0 424] /kesZUnz dqekj iq= Jh txUukFk fuoklh xzke cktiqj Fkkuk fo/kquw tuin&dkuiqj uxj dks xgu izf'k{k.k es Hksts tkus ds lEcU/k esA
lanHkZ%& vkidk i= la[;k%Hk&[email protected] fnukad 07&2006
d`i;k vius mijksDr lUnfHkZr i= dk voyksdu djus dk d"V djsa] ftlds }kjk bl tuin ds HkrhZ dsUnz ls p;fur fjdzwV vkj{kh psLV ua0 424 /kesZUnz dqekj ds fo:} iath;u vfHk;ksx ds lEcU/k esa lwpuk ,oa p;u fujLr fd;s tkus ds lEcU/k esa d`r dk;Zokgh ls voxr djk;s tkus dh vis{kk dh x;h gSA
mijksDr lUnHkZ esa voxr djkuk gS fd fjdzwV vkj{kh ps"V uEcj 424 /kesUnz dqekj ds fo:} bl tuin esa Fkkuk dksrokyh dUukSt ij eq0 v0 la0 [email protected] /kkjk [email protected]@471 Hkk0n0fo0 iathd`r djk;k x;k Fkk ftldh foospuk mi fujh{kd uk0 iq0 Jh izrki flag ;kno }kjk dh tk jgh gSA
mYys[kuh; gS fd fjdwzV vkj{kh /kesZUnz dqekj ds p;u fujLr fd;s tkus ds lEcU/k esa dk;kZy; ds vkns'k la[;k & Hk%&[email protected]&06 fnukad &27&11&2006 ds }kjk p;u fujLr fd;s tkus ds lEcU/k esa uksfVl fuxZr fd;k Fkk] ftlds ifjizs{; esa fjdzwV vkj{kh }kjk vius Li"Vhdj.k ds lkFk ekuuh; U;k;ky; ,e0,e0 v"Ve] dkuiqj uxj ds fu.kZ; fnukafdr 23&12&2006 dh Nk;k izfr] ftlesa fjdzwV vkj{kh dks mlds fo:} Fkkuk&fo/kuw tuin dkuiqj uxj ij iathd`r eq0v0la0 [email protected] /kkjk [email protected]@506 Hkk0n0 fo0 ds vfHk;ksx ds nks"keqDr fd;k x;k gS izLrqr djrs gq, mls xgu izf'k{k.k gsrq fHktok;s tkus dk vuqjks/k fd;k x;k gSA
bl lEcU/k esa v/kksgLrk{kjh }kjk T;s"B vfHk;kstu vf/kdkjh] dUukSt ls fof/kd vfHker izkIr fd;k x;k] ¼ftldh izfr i=koyh ij miyC/k gS½ ds xgjkbZ ls voyksdu ,oa ek0 U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; fnukafdr 23&12&2006 ds voyksduksijkUr fjdzwV vkj{kh /kesZUnz dqekj dks vkj{kh ds in ij ;ksX; ikrs gq,] mls xgu izf'k{k.k ij Hkstk tkuk Js;Ldj izrhr gksrk gSA
vr% fjdzwV vkj{kh psLV uEcj&424 /kesZUnz dqekj dks mlds lEcfU/r leLr ewy vfHkys[kksa ,oa pfj= iaftdk lfgr vkids tuin dks bl vuqjks/k ds lkFk Hkstk tk jgk gS fd vki d`i;k fjdwzV vkj{kh dh vken djds mldks ogkW izf'k{k.k ij Hksts tkus ds lEcU/k esa vius Lrj ls vfxze dk;Zokgh djus dk d"V djsaA
layXud% ;Fkksifj
fjdzwV vkj{kh ps0ua0424 /kesZUnz dqekj dh
vfHkys[kh; i=koyh dzekad 1 ls 53 rd [email protected]"V
¼,u0 pkS/kjh½
iqfyl v/kh{kd
dUukStA^^
The perusal of the letter quoted above shows that before its issuance, fact regarding the pendency of the criminal case and its non-disclosure followed by acquittal of the petitioner/non-appellant came in the knowledge of the administration. Taking acquittal of the petitioner/non-appellant into consideration, the competent authority found it appropriate to send the petitioner/non-appellant for training. During the course of the training, the petitioner/non-appellant was served a show-cause notice to cancel his appointment on the ground that he suppressed the fact regarding the pendency of criminal case while submitting affidavit. The adverse order was than passed.
Learned Single Judge has caused interference in the order mainly on the ground that the issue in regard to non-disclosure of pending criminal case and acquittal thereupon came to the notice of the authority concerned and having condoned it to allow the petitioner/non-appellant to proceed for training, administration could not have taken somersault thereupon to cancel the selection.
If we strictly go by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Avatar Singh vs. Union of India and others, 2016 (8) SCC, 471, than suppression of fact regarding the pendency of the case could have been taken by the concerned authority appropriately but having condoned the same and treated the petitioner/non-appellant to be eligible, could not have passed the order dated 08.01.2007.
Thus, no reason exists to cause interference in the judgment of the learned Single Judge and otherwise the criminal case was of trivial nature and was at the instance of the neighbour petitioner/non-appellant would be appointed on the post of constable on which it can not be taken so serious. Hence, the present special appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.1.2021
A.Dewal
