NAWAB KHAN Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.12.2011 passed in OA 2562/2011 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. The petitioner had filed the said original application seeking the setting aside of the order dated 11.06.2011 whereby his candidature was cancelled after the same has been considered by the Screening Committee which has also given an opportunity to the petitioner to show cause as to why the candidature should not be cancelled. The petitioner had also sought a declaration from the Tribunal that he was entitled to be appointed as a Constable (Executive) (Male) in Delhi Police on the basis of recruitment held in the Year 2009.

(2.) THE petitioner had applied for the said post of Constable (Executive) (Male) in Delhi Police in the recruitment held in the Year 2009 (phase-II). He was selected, subject to verification of character, antecedents, medical fitness and final checking of documents etc. THE petitioner had, in his application, disclosed that he has earlier been involved in the criminal case registered by virtue of FIR No.134/08 under Sections 323/341/324/354/326/307/34 IPC as also under Sections 3(i)(xi) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered at P.S. Rajgarh, District Alwar, Rajasthan. THE petitioner, however, had been acquitted by the Court by an order dated 14.11.2008. Insofar as the offences under Sections 323/324/341 and 354 IPC are concerned, the acquittal was on the basis of a compromise entered into between the prosecutrix and the petitioner. As regards the other offences under Sections 326 and 307/34 IPC and under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the petitioner was acquitted on the ground that all the prosecution witnesses had turned hostile and there was no witness to support the prosecution story.

(3.) THE Tribunal has correctly appreciated the distinction between the gravity of offences involved in the present case and that before the Supreme Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar (supra). THE Tribunal has also correctly placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Administration through its Chief Secretary & Others v. Sushil Kumar: (1997) SCC [L&S] 492.