Allahabad High Court
Ram Asre Yadav vs Union Of India Thru Secy. And ... on 26 April, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 32946 of 2010
Petitioner :- Ram Asre Yadav
Respondent :- Union Of India Thru Secy. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare,Kaushlesh Pratap Singh,Rajesh Nath Tripathi,Ravi Shanker Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- Govind Saran,Anand Kumar,Devendra Tripathi,K.P.Singh,S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Shri Rajesh Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 14.05.2010 passed by the Chief Security Commissioner, Southern Railway, Chennai-3 (Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition).
2) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents not to interfere in the petitioner's completing his training and functioning as Sub Inspector in Railway Protection Force under the respondents and also to pay the petitioner his regular monthly salary on the said regularly every month."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he being the candidate in pursuance to the Advertisement Notification issued for appointment over the post of Sub Inspector, wherein after crossing each and every channel of examination in shape of written, interview and physical, his name reflected in the final select list as prepared by the respondent no. 2 and while receiving the training over the post of Sub Inspector on verification of the document and personal antecedents, it came into knowledge that Criminal Case No. 27 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 I.P.C. is pending against the petitioner, wherein chargesheet has also been filed on 16.10.2006. However, during investigation the petitioner has not been called for, summoned or put for recording his statement either under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. before the concerned Investigating Officer or Magistrate and as such, the petitioner was completely unaware about any proceedings whatsoever has been initiated against him in the above mentioned case.
4. Considering the pendency of the above mentioned Case Crime against the petitioner, he has been pushed back from the training which arises cause of action in favour of the petitioner for preferring the present petition before this Court and later on vide order dated 14.05.2010 passed by the respondent no. 2 the petitioner was declared unfit and as such his candidature was cancelled.
5. Before passing the order dated 14.05.2010, a proper show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner and in reply of the same, the petitioner specifically mentioned that he hardly had any knowledge with regard to the aforesaid Criminal Case wherein the FIR has been lodged against the petitioner and as such, there is hardly any case of concealment of facts.
6. Moreover, the petitioner has been acquitted in same Criminal Case No. 27 of 2006, which has been tried by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 2, Varanasi vide judgement and order dated 03.06.2010 which is appended along with the rejoinder affidavit preferred by the petitioner.
7. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly stated that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Avatar Singh versus Union of India (2016) 8 SCC 431.
8. After hearing the rival contentions as raised by the learned counsels for the parties, it is crystal clear that the petitioner being the bonafide candidate and aspiring for the post of Sub Inspector already selected after crossing each and every examination in shape of written, interview as well as physical and as such, the petitioner is legally entitled to get the similar benefit as granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh (supra).
9. The similar controversy has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pawan Kumar versus Union of India & Anr. in Civil Appeal No. 3574 of 2022 decided on 02.05.2022.
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion of both the above mentioned judgements as well as several documents appended along with the petition as well as in the rejoinder affidavit, the Writ Petition stands allowed. The respondents are hereby directed to reinstate the petitioner in service over the post of Sub Inspector on which he was selected pursuant to his participation in reference to the Advertisement Notification dated 20.04.2007.
11. It is however, made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled for the arrears of salary for the period during which he has not served the force and at the same time he will be entitled for notional benefits, including seniority and other consequential benefits etc.
12. Necessary formal orders shall be passed by the competent authority within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 26.4.2023
SY
