LAWS(ALL)-2019-3-284

RAJIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Decided On March 11, 2019
RAJIV KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as a Constable in the Provincial Armed Constabulary on 26.08.2006, pursuant to his selection in the recruitment process. The appointment of the petitioner was cancelled by order dated 23.08.2007 passed by the Commandant 15th Battalion, P.A.C./Incharge Commandant 43rd Battalian, P.A.C., Etah.

(2.) The petitioner has assailed the order of cancellation of his appointment dated 23.08.2007 passed by the Commandant 15th Battalion, P.A.C. Etah in the instant writ petition. He has also prayed for consequential relief of backwages and payment of his salary as and when it becomes due.

(3.) Sri Pranjal Shukla, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Vijay Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the contents of the declaration made by the petitioner on affidavit at the time of his recruitment are not disputed. He does not contest the fact that the petitioner had faced criminal prosecution before the offending declaration was made. The declaration in one sense was incorrect. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that looking to the declaration at its face value to test the validity of the candidature of the petitioner would be a very superficial way looking at the controversy. The controversy was approached in this simplistic fashion by the authorities while passing the impugned order. Consequently, the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the rights of the petitioner vested by the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 have been violated.