Allahabad High Court
Narendra Pratap Singh vs The State Of U.P. And 6 Others on 23 March, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4061 of 2023
Petitioner :- Narendra Pratap Singh
Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Atipriya Gautam,Awadhesh Kumar Pandey,Jay Vishwanath Pandey,Kunal Shah,Rishabh Kesarwani,Suvansit Kumar Jaiswal,Sr. Advocate,Vipul Raj Gautam
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Kunal Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for all the respondents.
The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Authorities, to send the petitioner for necessary training on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police (Male/Female), Platoon Commander, PAC & Fire Station Second Officer Direct Recruitment- 2020-21, pursuant to the Advertisement dated 24/02/2021 & in pursuance of the merit list, issued vide Notification dated 12/06/2022.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, commanding the Respondent Authorities, to complete the formalities of character verification and Appoint the petitioner finally for the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police (Male/Female), Platoon Commander, PAC & Fire Station Second Officer Direct Recruitment -2020-21, pursuant to the Advertisement dated 24/02/2021 & in pursuance of the merit list, issued vide Notification dated 12/06/2022."
It is the case of the petitioner that he has qualified all the stages of the examination which has been conducted for recruitment over the post of Sub-Inspector in the Department of U.P. Police (Civil Police). At the last screening which has been carried out by the respondent no. 2 that is the medical examination conducted for all the newly selected candidates who have been finally shortlisted to be sent for training after medical examination and the same has been cleared successfully by the petitioner there is a mandatory format in shape of affidavit which has to be filled up by each and every candidate who has been shortlisted after the medical examination which is bearing the clause para 2 recruitment disclosure of the criminal case pending or in any matter the conviction has been determined by the competent Court.
The petitioner immediately after medical examination submitted the entire information in shape of the affidavit as prescribed by the respondent no. 2 wherein the specific disclosure of F.I.R. which has already been registered wherein the petitioner has been implicated as accused under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 452 and 307 IPC as case crime no. 0011 of 2021, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba and might has also mentioned that after proper inquiry the final report has been submitted in favour of the petitioner.
The proper disclosure as required in the format has already been submitted and thereafter the petitioner was waiting for his call for mandatory training required before the posting. All the other similarly situated candidates have been called for training but the name of the petitioner has not been sent by respondent no. 4 whereas the listing of other candidates have been sent vide covering letter dated 23.02.2023 which created a cause of action in favour of the petitioner to prefer the instant petition when no proper reply has been received over the representation dated 24.02.2023 as placed before respondent no. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner raised his arguments that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered with the judgement as given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Avatar Singh Vs. Union of India and others, (2016) 8 SCC 471 wherein it has been held that mere pendency of the criminal proceedings cannot bar the candidature of any aspirant who is willing to join the Government service and final decision is subject to the outcome of the decision whatsoever will be taken by the competent authority of the department.
The requisition in shape of the representation is still pending to be decided by the respondent no. 4 and without deciding the same non-sending the name of the petitioner for training is a malicious and brazen exercise initiated against the petitioner.
Per contra learned Standing counsel vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and submitted on behalf of the respondent no. 2 that the entire exercise has already been finalised at the end of the Chairman/Secretary Uttar Pradesh Recruitment and Promotional Board and as such there is hardly any fault on the part of the respondent no. 2 and the relief sought in the petition is not at all related to him.
After hearing the submissions as made by the rival learned counsels the representation as preferred by the petitioner on dated 24.02.2023 before the respondent no. 4 is also copy to respondent no. 2 who is the agency responsible for selecting the candidates for appointment. In the present case appointment shall be followed with the mandatory training which has to be successfully completed by the candidates for the post of Sub-Inspector, U.P. Police (Civil Police) and as such the recommendation by the selecting body to the establishment shall be sent by the respondent no. 2 and the same has to be done but unfortunately the name of the petitioner has not been shown in the same list.
The matter of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Avatar Singh (supra) and as such the respondent no. 2 (the Chairman/Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment & Promotional Board, Tulsi Ganga Complex, 19-C, Vidhan Sabha Marg, U.P. Lucknow) is hereby directed to decide the representation as preferred by the petitioner on dated 24.02.2023 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order in the light of judgment of Avatar Singh (supra).
Meanwhile, the petitioner may be sent for training along with those candidates who have already been selected in the same selection procedure as initiated by the respondent no. 2.
The decision over the representation will decide the future course of action whatsoever is required by the respondent no. 4, since mere training will not confer any right in favour of the petitioner for continuance in services if the case found otherwise regarding his suitability.
The writ petition is hereby disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 23.3.2023
Shaswat
