SHUBHAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

(2.) The petitioner is seeking quashing and setting aside of the communication dtd. 10/2/2020, issued by Respondent No.4 i.e. the Senior Commandant, Recruit Training Centre (RTC), Bhilai, thereby informing the petitioner that his request for granting certain period to join the post of Constable in CISF has been refused and in consequence, cancelling his appointment letter. The petitioner is also seeking a direction to Respondent No.4 to admit him to the training according to the communication dtd. 10/1/2020.

(3.) According to the petitioner, as per the advertisement dtd. 24/1/2015, issued by Respondent No.1, he applied for the post of Constable (GD), as mentioned in the said advertisement. Accordingly, he got selected for the said post. Consequently, Respondent No.3 i.e. the Commandant, CISF Unit, ONGC, Mumbai, issued a letter of appointment dtd. 23/3/2017 to the petitioner. However, due to registration of serious crime against the petitioner, he was not allowed to join the training. The petitioner thereafter filed Criminal Application No. 1882 of 2018 before this Court for quashing the First Information Report registered against him with Kannad Police Station for the offences mentioned therein. The Division Bench of this Court (Coram: T. V. Nalawade and Mangesh S. Patil, JJ.), vide order dtd. 11/3/2019, quashed the aforesaid First Information Report against the petitioner. Accordingly, the Standing Screening Committee of the Respondents then considered the case of the petitioner and directed him to join the services on 14/9/2020. However, the petitioner, due to his personal reasons, could not attend the said training and therefore, vide letter dtd. 10/1/2020, Respondent No.4 again asked the petitioner to join the services on or before 23/1/2020 by considering his application dtd. 27/11/2019. However, due to his personal reasons, the petitioner again sought time for joining the said post by making various applications. Ultimately, as the petitioner could not join the services within the extended period granted by Respondent No.4, his further request for extension of time to join the services was rejected vide communication dtd. 10/2/2020 and his appointment was also cancelled. Hence this petition.