MAHESH KUMAR CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution petitioner has assailed the order dtd. 19/12/2023 whereby his claim for compassionate appointment has been deferred only on the ground that there is criminal case pending against him and his claim for compassionate appointment could be reconsidered only after his acquittal in the pending criminal case and another order dtd. 2/1/2024 whereby the Executive Engineer has expressed view that his character certificate issued by the District Magistrate shall be liable to be considered only after his acquittal in the criminal case as the character certificate itself contained a rider that there was criminal case pending against the petitioner and upon his conviction in the said criminal case, the character certificate would loose its relevance. Copy of the character certificate on the basis of which the impugned orders have come to be passed has been brought on record as annexure No. 14 to the petition.

(3.) It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that in the criminal case in which the petitioner has come to be implicated was only on account old standing enmity between the families and there was no role assigned to the petitioner in the first information report which may have given an impression to the authorities that petitioner would be liable to be held guilty of moral turpitude so as to disentitle him for any appointment in government service. It is further argued that there is no criminal history to the credit of the petitioner and in the light of the guidelines laid down in the case of Avtar Singh v. Union of India 2016 (8) SCC 471 petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment could have been considered, moreso in the circumstances when the District Magistrate has not recalled his character certificate issued to petitioner till date.