JADHAV SIDDHODHAN ANKUSH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Gulab Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nand Lal, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 to 4.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court was validly selected and appointed as constable with Central Industrial Security Force and given posting at its Unit N.C.L. Indauli (M.P.). However, while he was working on probation, the Senior Commandant of CISF, Shakti Nagar, District Sonebhadra passed an order under the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, by which his services were terminated as per Clause 3 of the Attestation Form filed by him.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the attestation form which he was required to submit at the time of his appointment with respondent, there was column no. 12 (b) which contained a clause with recital "if you have ever been prosecuted", and was to be answered in either affirmative or negative. However, due to inadvertent mistake, petitioner put an astrick at word "No" instead world 'Yes'. He further submits that since petitioner had been acquitted in a criminal case instituted against him under Sec. 294, 352,506,509, 34 IPC , he thought that it was not necessary to refer to the prosecution case in which he was acquitted wayback in the year 2010. In the said case he claimed that petitioner had been acquitted much prior to his application submitted against vacancy in question. He further submits that the order in question though is termination simpliciter in nature taking recourse to the provision of subrule 4 of Rule 36 of Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 and Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, but lifting the veil the foundation for passing the order has been non disclosure of criminal case in which petitioner was prosecuted sometimes back, though acquitted in the year 2010.