Shivam Singh vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 21173 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18799 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Shivam Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Mehrotra,Srijan Mehrotra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.

The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05.07.2022 whereby the petitioner has been non-suited to undergo the training only the ground that the petitioner did not disclose the pendency of a criminal case against him while filing the application.

The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that while filing the application, which is on record as Annexure no.1, there was no requirement for disclosing the pendency of the criminal case against the petitioner and thus, it cannot be said that there was non-disclosure of material facts. He further draws my attention to the affidavit filed by the petitioner and as contained in Annexure no.3 wherein the petitioner had disclosed the pendency of first information report no.164 of 2017 and a case no.2083 of 2017 emanating therefrom. He argues that there was no allegation against the petitioner and the allegation is against the father of the petitioner who had entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant. He lastly argues that in any event, the order impugned has been passed only on the ground of concealment of material facts which is patently erroneous. He also draws my attention of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Avtar Singh vs Union of India and others, 2016 (8) SCC 471 followed by Pawan Kumar vs Union of India; (2022) SCC OnLine SC 532 and Satish Chandra Yadav vs Union of India and others; Civil Appeal No.6955 of 2022 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20860 of 2019 decided on 26.09.2022 to argue that it is incumbent upon the respondents to pass an order after taking into consideration the nature of the allegations levelled and the effect of the said allegations on the services sought to be rendered which has not been done.

Considering the submissions made at the bar and on perusal of the impugned order which non-suits the petitioner only on the ground of concealment of fact which is on the face of it contrary to the records as contained in the Anenxure no.3. The order is further bad in law inasmuch as it does not follow the mandate of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Avtar Singh, Pawan Kumar and Satish Chandra Yadav (supra).

Accordingly the order impugned 05.07.2022 is set aside with direction to the respondents to pass fresh orders after giving due consideration to the guidelines given by the Supreme Court in the cases of Avtar Singh, Pawan Kumar and Satish Chandra Yadav (supra). The fresh order shall be passed within a period of two months from today.

The writ petition stands disposed off with the said observations.

Order Date :- 15.12.2022

VNP/-