RAKESHBHAI ARVINDBHAI BARIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.Maulik G.Nanavati, learned advocate, waives service of notice of RULE on behalf of respondents Nos.1 to 3. On the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and finally decided, today.

(2.) BY preferring this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.08.2010 passed by the Director General of Police (respondent No.2), whereby, the order dated 11.05.2010 passed by District Superintendent of Police (respondent No.3), terminating the services of the petitioner as Armed Police Constable has been confirmed.

(3.) THE petition has been contested by Mr.Maulik G.Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader, by submitting that in Column No.10 of the Attestation Form, information had been sought whether there is any criminal case pending in any Court of law, the decision thereof and details of conviction, if any. THE petitioner was bound to answer correctly and mention the filing of the criminal case against him as well as the decision thereupon. As he has omitted to do so, it is a clear case of suppression of material facts in order to obtain Government employment. As the orders of termination have been passed after considering the explanation of the petitioner, and as they do not suffer from any illegality, this Court may not interfere. In support of the above submissions, the learned Assistant Government Pleader has placed reliance upon the following judgments: