Service Law – Recruitment – Selection – Non-disclosure of a criminal case in verification – Appellant applied for the post of constable – After submitting application, he was embroiled in a criminal case – He cleared exam – In the criminal case, appellant was acquitted – After being selected, the appellant submitted affidavit that no criminal case was ever registered against him – His selection was cancelled vide letter dated 12.04.2005 as appellant had concealed the offence and filed false affidavit:
Held: On the date of the application, there was no criminal case pending and there was no suppression in the application form – The verification documents after noticing the criminal case and the subsequent acquittal stated that his character was good, that no complaints were found against him and that his general reputation was good – The SHO, who forwarded the report to the Superintendent of Police after reiterating the contents of the report observed that appellant was acquitted and no appeal was filed – The SHO certified the character of the candidate as excellent and that he was eligible to do Government Service under the State Government – The Superintendent of Police, in his letter to the Commandant, endorsed the report and reiterated that the character of the candidate was excellent – In the instant case, the Appointing Authority has mechanically held selection as irregular and illegal because the appellant had furnished an affidavit with incorrect facts – On applying the broad principles set out in para 93.7 of Satish Chandra Yadav, the order of cancellation dated 12.04.2005 is neither fair nor reasonable – Clause 9 (i.e. if any fact is concealed in the affidavit by the candidate, his candidature is liable for cancellation) of the recruitment notification has to be read in the context of the law laid down in the cases of the Supreme Court – Broad-brushing every non-disclosure as a disqualification, will be unjust and the same will tantamount to being completely oblivious to the ground realities – Each case will depend on the facts and circumstances that prevail thereon, and the court will have to take a holistic view, based on objective criteria, with the available precedents serving as a guide – Thus, the order dated 12.04.2005 is quashed and set aside – The respondents are directed to appoint the appellant in service on the post of Constable. [Paras 29 and 30]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.