DEVNATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Kunal Shah for the petitioners; the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents; and have perused the record.

(2.) In brief the facts giving rise to this petition are as follows:

(3.) Assailing the cancellation order, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the grounds cited in the impugned order might be germane to cancellation of the contract, if established, but they cannot be taken as ground to cancel the character certificate issued to the petitioners because nothing adverse has been said with regard to the character of the petitioners. Further, in none of the firms or Company of the petitioners Rajnath Singh had a place. It is submitted that a character certificate is nothing but a report that nothing adverse in relation to the character of that person exists. If there exists nothing adverse touching the character of that person, then the character certificate once issued is not to be cancelled. Otherwise also, it cannot be cancelled by looking at the adverse material against a relative of the certificate holder. In a nutshell, the submission is that cancellation of the character certificate can only take place if the person to whom such certificate is issued is of bad character or that he has suppressed relevant information touching his character. In the instant case, no statement made by the petitioners to obtain character certificate has been found false. Even in the impugned order, the District Magistrate, Mau has not been able to point out a single case against the petitioners, and, therefore, cancellation of the character certificate issued to the petitioners only on the ground that a relative of the petitioners has criminal antecedents is not justified and the action of the District Magistrate in cancelling the character certificate is arbitrary.