Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Satyanarayan Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:37984) on 12 September, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (1 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15388/2023

Satyanarayan Meena S/o Shri Ram Pal Meena, Aged About 25
Years, Resident Of Village Sirodi, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, State
Institute Of Agriculture Management Premises,
Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. The Director, Elementary Education And Panchayati Raj
(Elementary Education) Rajasthan, Bikaner.
4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary
Education, Jodhpur.
----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Chandak with
Ms. Sonal Parihar for
Mr. B. L. Bhati, AAG
Mr. Anurag Bhojwani for
Mr. Manvendra K.S. Bhati

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

Reportable

12/09/2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with

the prayer that he may be granted appointment on the post of

Primary School Teacher (General/Special Education) (Level-1) in

pursuance of the selection process undertaken vide advertisement

dated 16.12.2022.

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (2 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

3. Briefly noted the facts in the present case are that the

petitioner applied for the post of Primary School Teacher

(General/Special Education) (Level-1) in pursuance of the

advertisement issued by the respondents on 16.12.2022. After

having cleared the written examination, the petitioner was called

for the verification of his documents. After scrutinizing the

documents, the respondents found that the petitioner suppressed

the information with respect to pendency of a criminal case

against him. Consequently, the respondents did not issue the

appointment order in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the present

writ petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that

the petitioner is a meritorious person and has cleared the written

examination. He submits that in the attestation form submitted

by the petitioner, he left the Column No.12-blank. He further

submits that the petitioner submitted three attestation forms and

in Column No.12 of the 1st attestation form, he mentioned that

'Yes- one case is pending(domestic violence)'. In the 2 nd

attestation form submitted by the petitioner, the Column No.12

was left blank. He also submits that when the petitioner was called

for the document verification, he submitted all the requisite

documents including the document of the criminal case and,

therefore, he has not suppressed any information from the

respondent-Department. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that

the respondents may be directed to issue appointment order in

favour of the petitioner.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents, while

negating the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner,

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (3 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

submits that it is a clear case of concealment and

misrepresentation practised by the petitioner. He also submits

that the attestation form which is produced before this Court from

Page No.66 & 67 of the writ petition, wherein Column No.12 it has

been mentioned 'Yes- one case is pending (domestic violence) was

never submitted to the respondent-Department. Learned counsel

for the respondents also submits that the attestation form which

was actually submitted by the petitioner is produced before this

Court along with their additional affidavit, wherein Column No.12,

the petitioner had put in a 'cross(x)'. Not only this, on 07.07.2023,

the petitioner under his own signature had given in writing that

there is no case of criminal nature pending or decided against him

and if any information with respect to the criminal case pending or

decided against the petitioner comes to the knowledge of the

respondent-Department, the respondent-Department may

disqualify him for appointment. The self declaration form dated

07.07.2023 is also placed on record by the respondents along with

their additional affidavit.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents therefore submit that it

is a clear case of suppression of material facts from the

respondent-Department for getting the appointment on the post of

Primary School Teacher (General/Special Education) (Level-1) as a

criminal case being FIR No.222/2019 was registered against the

petitioner at Police Station Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh for the

offence under Sections 452, 143, 341 & 323 of the IPC in which

police, after investigation, filed charge-sheet for the offence under

Sections 341, 323, 324 & 34 of IPC. Learned counsel also submits

that if a person who is having the credentials as mentioned above,

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (4 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

is given appointment on the post of Primary School Teacher, such

person would ruin and spoil future of the young generation while

teaching them in school. Learned counsel for the respondents

further submits that the petitioner never disclosed about the

pendency of criminal case but the same was inquired by the

respondent-Department on a complaint received by them. Learned

counsel, therefore, pray that the writ petition may be dismissed.

7. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone

through the relevant record of the case.

8. The petitioner has annexed a copy of the attestation form

along with the writ petition which is at Page Nos.66 & 67 of the

writ petition, wherein, in Column No.12, he mentioned 'Yes-one

case is pending(domestic violence)' but this attestation form was

never submitted to the respondent-Department. The Column

No.12 of the second attestation form which is annexed with the

writ petition at Page Nos.68 & 69 was left blank. The attestation

form which is submitted by the respondents along with their

affidavit clearly reflects that in Column No.12, the petitioner had

put in a 'cross(x)'. Further, the petitioner has also submitted a self

declaration form dated 07.07.2023 which is placed on record by

the respondents along with their additional affidavit, wherein, he

clearly stated that neither any criminal case is pending nor

decided in the past against the petitioner. It will be useful to

reproduce contents of the self declaration form dated 07.07.2023

filed by the petitioner under his own signatures, pertaining to the

pendency of the criminal case, therefore, the same is reproduced

as under :-

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (5 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

"vkijkf/kd izdj.k u gksus dk Lo&?kks"k.kk i= eSa lR;ukjk;.k eh.kk iq=@iq=h@iRuh Jh jkeiky eh.kk fuoklh xkao fljksMh iksLV cksjnk ftyk fprksMx<+ 'kiFkiwoZd c;ku djrk@djrh gw¡ fd izkFkfed fo|ky; v/;kid lh/kh HkrhZ&2022 varxZr tkjh foKfIr la[;k & 12@2022 fnukad % 16-12-2022 ds rgr~ vuqlwfpr@xSj vuqlwfpr esa v/;kid] ysoy&izFke lkekU;@fo'ks"k f'k{kk ¼,e-vkj- @oh-vkbZ-@,p-vkbZ-Js.kh½ ds in ij foHkkx }kjk fnukad % 26@05@2023 dks nLrkost lR;kiu@ik=rk tk¡p gsrq tkjh 'kkWVZ fyLVsM vH;fFkZ;ksa dh lwph esa esjk uke lfEefyr gS eSa ;g Lo?kks"k.kk djrk@djrh gw¡ fd 1- esjs fo:) fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vkijkf/kd izdj.k fopkjk/khu@yfEcr ugha gS rFkk iwoZ esa Hkh fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vkijkf/kd izdj.k ntZ ugha gqvk gSA 2- esjs fo:) ;fn fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vkijkf/kd izdj.k ik;k tk, ;k eSaus vkijkf/kd izdj.k ds lEcU/k esa dksbZ rF; fNik;k gks rks foHkkx eq>s vik= ?kksf"kr dj ldrk gSA ftldk ftEesnkj eSa Lo;a jgw¡xk@jgw¡xhA LFkku %& fprksMx<+ fnukad %& 07@07@23 vH;FkhZ ds gLrk{kj lgh@& uke %& lR;ukjk;.k eh.kk vkosnu la[;k %& 202326435504 jksy uacj %& 1278937 Lo&lR;kiu eSa lR;ukjk;.k eh.kk iq=@iq=h@iRuh Jh jkeiky eh.kk mez 24 o"kZ] tkfr eh.kk fuoklh fprksMx<+ O;olk; &&& lR;kiu djrk@djrh gw¡ fd mDr Lo?kks"k.kk&i= esa vafdr lHkh dFku esjh tkudkjh ,oa fu"Bk ds vuqlkj lgh ,oa lR; gSA blesa eSaus dksbZ Hkh rF; ugha fNik;k gSA ;fn esjh mDr ?kks"k.kk feF;k ikbZ tkrh gS vFkok dksbZ rF; Nqik;k tkuk ik;k tkrk gS rks blds dkj.k foHkkx eq>s vik= ? kksf"kr dj ldrk gSA gLrk{kj lgh@& vH;FkhZ dk uke %& lR;ukjk;.k eh.kk"

9. A criminal case being FIR No.222/2019 was registered

against the petitioner at Police Station Chittorgarh, District

Chittorgarh for the offence under Sections 452, 143, 341 & 323 of

the IPC in which the police, after investigation, filed charge-sheet

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (6 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 324 & 34 of IPC but this

fact was not disclosed by the petitioner.

10. Narration of the above facts clearly demonstrates that

petitioner has suppressed material information from the

respondent-Department regarding the criminal case registered

against him. It is not relevant how serious the charges were in

the criminal case or under which sections, the petitioner was

charged in the criminal case, what is relevant in the present case,

is non-disclosure or suppression of information of criminal case in

the attestation form/other forms filled in by the petitioner for

seeking employment in the respondent-Department. In the

opinion of this Court, suppression of the material fact itself is a

ground or reason to deny the employment in the respondent-

Department. It is also noteworthy that when a person is going to

be appointed on the post of Teacher, the conduct & character of

such person becomes all the more relevant and important. When a

person is entrusted with the pious duty of imparting education and

Sanskar to the young children, then the most important & relevant

criteria for selection of that person should be trustfulness and

unimpeachable integrity. In the present case, since the

appointment is going to be made on the post of Primary School

Teacher who is going to teach the young students in the school

and, if credentials of such a person is on the foundations of

falsehood, fraud and misrepresentation, then the institution in

which he is going to be posted will have a bleak future. In the

humble opinion of this Court such person does not deserve any

leniency from the Court, even if he is meritorious.

[2024:RJ-JD:37984] (7 of 7) [CW-15388/2023]

11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in para-12 of the judgment

rendered in the case of Rajasthan Rajya Vidyug Prasaran

Nigam Ltd. V/s Anil Kanwariya, reported (2021) 10 SCC

136 has held as under : -

"12. The issue/question may be considered from another angle, from the employer's point of view. The question is not about whether an employee was involved in a dispute of trivial nature and whether he has been subsequently acquitted or not. The question is about the credibility and/or trustworthiness of such an employee who at the initial stage of the employment, i.e., while submitting the declaration/verification and/or applying for a post made false declaration and/or not disclosing and/or suppressing material fact of having involved in a criminal case. If the correct facts would have been disclosed, the employer might not have appointed him. Then the question is of TRUST. Therefore, in such a situation, where the employer feels that an employee who at the initial stage itself has made a false statement and/or not disclosed the material facts and/or suppressed the material facts and therefore he cannot be continued in service because such an employee cannot be relied upon even in future, the employer cannot be forced to continue such an employee. The choice/option whether to continue or not to continue such an employee always must be given to the employer. At the cost of repetition, it is observed and as observed hereinabove in catena of decision such an employee cannot claim the appointment and/or continue to be in service as a matter of right."

12. In view of the discussions made above, the present writ

petition lacks merit and the same is, therefore, dismissed.

13. The stay petition as well as other pending applications, if

any, stand disposed of.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 24-SunilS/-