GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI Vs. SUMIT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the order dated 16.10.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, is under challenge. The respondent had applied for the post of Constable (Executive) in the Delhi Police for the Recruitment Year 2003. He had filed his application for the same on 12.03.2009 and he had also submitted an Attestation Form on 22.10.2009. In both, the application form as well as the Attestation Form, the respondent had not disclosed that he had been involved in FIR No. 60/2004 under Sections 323/325 of IPC registered at Police Station Nangal Chaudhary (Haryana), District Haryana, registered on 19.06.2004. The respondent had cleared the tests and was being considered for employment when this fact was discovered by the petitioner and consequently a show-cause notice dated 23.03.2010 was issued to the respondent asking him to show cause as to why his candidature ought not to be cancelled. The respondent submitted a reply in which he had specifically taken the plea that he was under the impression that, as he had been acquitted, it was not necessary for him to provide the said information with regard to his involvement in the said FIR. In the said reply, the respondent also informed the petitioner that at the time when the FIR was registered, the respondent was a juvenile and it is because of this that his case was considered by the Juvenile Justice Board in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). In fact, it was pointed out that he had been acquitted by the Juvenile Justice Board on 10.08.2007 which was much prior to his having applied, inasmuch as his application was dated 12.03.2009.

(2.) The petitioner did not accept the reply submitted by the respondent and cancelled the candidature of the respondent by virtue of the order dated 21.10.2010. It is against that order that the respondent preferred the said Original Application which has culminated in the impugned order dated 16.01.2012, whereby the order dated 21.10.2010 has been set aside.

(3.) In the impugned order, the Tribunal has essentially placed reliance on decisions of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court. The main decision relied upon by the Tribunal was that of Commissioner of Police & Others v. Sandeep Kumar, 2011 4 SCC 644