Sri Gundu Gocharan vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5011 Tel

               HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
                                  AND
             HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO


                 WRIT PETITION No.35114 OF 2022
                           Date:11.10.2022
Between:

Sri Gundu Gocharan S/o.Gundu Krishna,
Aged 31 yrs, Occu : Service,
R/o.H.No.6-3-584/8, Khairtabad,
Hyderabad, Telangana 500 004


                                                  .....Petitioner
     And

The State of Telangana,
Through Secretary to Government,
Legal Affairs, Legislative Affairs and Justice,
Law Department, 8th floor,
D-Block, BRKR Buildings,
T.S.Secretariat, Hyderabad 500 063 & others

                                                  .....Respondents

The Court made the following:

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

WRIT PETITION No.35114 OF 2022

ORDER : (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Naveen Rao)

In response to the notification No.9/2019 dated 31.07.2019

petitioner participated in the recruitment for selection to the post of

Office Subordinate. Petitioner was provisionally selected and on due

verification of eligibility, petitioner was given provisional appointment.

On verification of antecedents of the petitioner, as it came to the

notice of the High Court that petitioner was involved in Crime No.06 of

2016 registered under Sections 341, 323, 290 r/w. section 34 IPC in

Punjagutta Police Station, his provisional selection was cancelled by

the Official Memorandum dated 05.08.2022. Challenging the same

this writ petition is filed.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

standing counsel Sri B.Nalin Kumar representing respondents No.2

and 3.

3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner

has not suppressed any material information regarding involvement in

the criminal case. There was no column which requires furnishing of

information on involvement in a criminal case. Therefore there was no

occasion for the petitioner to disclose his involvement in Crime No.06

of 2016, whereas his provisional selection was cancelled on the

ground that in the revised attestation form submitted by the

petitioner, he suppressed the information about his involvement in

Crime No.06 of 2016. Therefore, cancellation of provisional selection

on this ground is erroneous. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

also drawn our attention to the recruitment notification.

4. According to the learned standing counsel Sri B.Nalin Kumar

though there was no requirement of disclosure of involvement in

crime, but the employer is entitled to verify the antecedents of a

person before employing him and on such verification it was found

that petitioner was involved in Crime No.06 of 2016 which ultimately

ended in compromise before the Lok Adalat. Therefore, the employer

is entitled to cancel the provisional selection and appointment and no

illegality is committed in doing so.

5. Both sides have cited various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court on the issue of involvement in crime and provision of

employment etc. We are not expressing any opinion on merits of

whether involvement of petitioner in Crime No.06 of 2016 which

ultimately ended in compromise before the Lok Adalat would have any

impact on provision of employment to the petitioner, as the rejection

was not on that ground but was on the ground that petitioner

suppressed the information of involvement in crime. Petitioner cannot

be penalized by canceling the provisional selection on the ground that

he has suppressed in furnishing information of his involvement in

crime when there was no such requirement prescribed in the

recruitment notification or was asked from him. Therefore, it does not

amount to suppression of material fact. Thus, the reason assigned for

cancellation of provisional selection is not valid and is liable to be set

aside.

6. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. The matter is remanded to

the respondent No.3 for consideration of the claim of the petitioner for

appointment based on performance in the recruitment notification No.

9 of 2019. On his involvement in Crime No.06 of 2016 which ended in

compromise before Lok Adalat it is open to the petitioner to submit

representation setting forth his version. If he chooses to file a

representation, it shall be filed within two weeks from the date of

receipt of copy of this order. On filing such representation or

otherwise, the 3rd respondent shall consider the entitlement of

petitioner for employment having regard to his involvement in Crime

No.06 of 2016 registered in Punjagutta Police Station that ended in

compromise before Lok Adalat and pass appropriate orders within a

period of four weeks thereafter.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

_______________________ J.SREENIVAS RAO, J 11th October, 2022 Rds/Sus