Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Hasidul Islam vs Union Of India & Ors on 14 November, 2022
14.11.2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
DL-14 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(PP) APPELLATE SIDE
Ct.21
WPA 22413 of 2022
Hasidul Islam
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Pinaki Ranjan Chakraborty
....for the petitioner.
Mr. Dipankar Dandhpath
....for Union of India.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today is
retained with the records.
The petitioner's case is that the petitioner was
issued an offer of appointment dated March 16, 2021
as a Constable in Sashastra Seema Bal, District -
Supaul (Bihar). Thereafter, the petitioner's
representations for extension of the joining period
dated June 20, 2021, July 29, 2021 and August 23,
2021 to the post of the constable were all rejected.
The rejection letter is dated August 26, 2021. The
offer of appointment issued to the petitioner on March
16, 2021, clearly stipulated that the same would
lapse after expiry of 6 months. Since the petitioner
failed to join by the stipulated date, his offer letter
was cancelled by a Memorandum dated February 21,
2022.
2
Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel, appearing
on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner
could not join since a criminal case was pending in
the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court,
District - Malda against him, being P. S. Case
No.435/2016 dated October 6, 2016. The judgment
and order in the said case was passed on May 4,
2022 whereby the petitioner was honourably released.
Therefore, the failure on the part of the petitioner to
provide the necessary character certificate was not
due to his own fault. Since the order/judgment
passed by the criminal court was after the expiry of 6
months from the offer of appointment, the petitioner
should not be penalised due to no fault of his own.
He prays for setting aside and/or cancellation of the
memorandum dated August 3, 2022 given in
response to his prayer/representation and
reconsideration of the petitioner's offer of
appointment.
Mr. Dandhpath, learned counsel, appearing on
behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner
has approached this Hon'ble Court with unclean
hands. He draws the attention of this Court to Rule
4(h) of the Memorandum dated March 16, 2021
issued by the Directorate General, Sashastra Seema
Bal, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India in
support of his contention that in the event a case is
prosecuted against a candidate in any court of law,
copy of the orders passed by the court have to be
submitted and if the case is pending against a
candidate, copy of the complete case documents were
required to be submitted. He further argues referring
to column 12 of the 'verification roll' submitted by the
petitioner that the same was left blank by him. The
petitioner neither submitted the complete case
documents nor made any statement with regard to
the fact whether he was arrested/prosecuted etc. that
he was mandatorily required to do.
Having considered the rival submissions of the
parties and the materials placed on record, this Court
is of the view that the petitioner has deliberately left
column 12 blank in the 'verification roll' submitted by
him. Furthermore, the petitioner also failed to
comply with the mandatory requirement of producing
the entire case documents since a court case was
pending against him.
Having approached this Hon'ble Court with
unclean hands, the petitioner is not entitled to any
relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In the light of the discussions above, WPA
22413 of 2022 is dismissed without any order as to
costs.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this
order duly downloaded from the official website of
this Hon'ble Court.
Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if
applied for, be supplied to the parties upon
compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Lapita Banerji, J.)
