SURENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 02.03.2006, passed by His Lordship Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dilip Gupta, sitting singly, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39526 of 1998 (Surendra Singh Yadav v. Union of India and Anr. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39526 of 1998).

(2.) The judgment aforesaid is assailed on the ground that there is no statutory format prescribed for submitting an application for appointment to the post of Constable (Recruit). It is also stated that the Petitioner-Appellant had actually been acquitted in Criminal Case No. 458 of 1997, under Sections 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. P.S. Saidpur, District Ghazipur, hence any omission in furnishing his antecedents in the verification roll in the application form could not have been a ground for dismissing the Appellant from service. It is also stated that the learned Single Judge has failed to notice in the writ petition the judgment dated 24.09.1999, passed by His Lordship Hon'ble Mr. Justice O.P. Garg in C.M.W.P. No. 4591 of 1999 in re: Anuj Kumar v. D.I.G. Karmik, PHQ and Ors. C.M.W.P. No. 4591 of 1999and the judgment dated 28.01.2004, passed by His Lordship Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhanwar Singh in C.M.W.P. No. 3045 (S/S) of 2003 in re: Udai Vir Singh v. Union of India and Ors. C.M.W.P. No. 3045(S/S) of 2003. Copies of these judgments have been appended along with this special appeal.

(3.) It is lastly submitted that the impugned judgment has the effect on fundamental rights of the Petitioner-Appellant. The impugned judgment and order could not have been passed without issuing any show cause notice and affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner-Appellant. Principles of natural justice has not been followed while passing the impugned judgment and order. The termination order of the Petitioner-Appellant was liable to be quashed by the learned Single Judge.