VIRENDRA JATAV Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal takes exception to order dtd. 20/8/2020, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 27106 of 2018, whereby petition filed by appellant-petitioner has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts of the case are that in pursuance of an advertisement issued by the respondents, the appellant appeared for recruitment test for the post of Police Constable conducted in the year 2017. The appellant was selected for the post of Constable (G.D.) and was allotted 26th Battalion, Special Armed Forces, Guna Unit. Vide order dated on 10/8/2018, the appellant was directed to appear before the screening committee on 17/8/2018 at 10:00 A.M. with respect to his character verification. The appellant appeared on 10/8/2018 and explained the circumstances. On 26/10/2018 the respondent authorities, while taking into consideration the fact that Crime No.19 of 2008 for offences punishable under Ss. 363, 366, 376 and 506/34 of IPC was registered against the appellant at Police Station - Doraha, District Sihore, found that the nature of the service to which the appellant was to be inducted requires that an incumbent should not only be eligible but his character should be above-board and a person having criminal antecedents should not be inducted to a force that requires observance to strict discipline and accordingly he was not found "suitable" for appointment on the post in question for Police Department. The appellant challenged the order dtd. 26/10/2018 before this Court. Learned Single Judge vide impugned order dismissed the petition. Hence, the appellant is in this intra court appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the decision taken by the authorities not to appoint the appellant is erroneous. The same has been passed without taking into consideration the fact that crime in question was registered against the appellant in the year 2008. The same was with respect to love affair of the appellant with a girl belonging to other caste and therefore, at the instance of parents of the girl, an F.I.R. was registered. The competent Court has honorably acquitted the appellant and a perusal of the finding recorded by the competent Court would clearly demonstrate that acquittal was honorable. The appellant did not suppress any material fact and had clearly disclosed in his form that he had faced a criminal trial where he was honorably acquitted. Under such circumstances, according to him, learned Single Judge has erred in dismissing the writ petition, therefore, an interference is called for. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of R.P. Kapur Vs. Union of India and Another,AIR 1964 SC 787. Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and Others,(2016) 8 SCC 471. Swaran Singh Chand Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board and Others,(2009) 13 SCC 758. G.Jayalal Vs. Union of India and Others, (2013) 7 SCC 150. and Mohammed Imran Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, C.A.No.10571 of 2018. and the full bench decision of this Court in the matter of Ashutosh Pawar Vs. High Court of M.P. and Another,(2018) 2 MPLJ 419.