SURAJ RUPINI, WEST TRIPURA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THIS writ petition falls within a short compus. The petitioner while filling up the attestation form after receipt of his offer of appointment dated 16.09.2009, Annexure -1 to the writ petition, wrote 'No ' against the column No.13(i) containing the queries, whether any criminal case pending against him in any Court of Law at that time. But, when the matter was verified, it was found that, at the relevant point of time the petitioner was facing a criminal trial in connection with Jirania P.S. Case No.41/2009, registered under Sections 148/149/323/427/379 of the IPC. Accordingly, his offer was recalled. Being aggrieved by that action of the respondents, the petitioner has filed this petition.

(3.) FROM the other side, Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents has submitted that the apex court has held that pendency of a criminal prosecution may not be a bar for employment, but suppression of that fact in the attestation form belies the integrity of the petitioner and, as such, his retention in the service may not be suitable. In support of his contention, he has relied on a decision of the apex court in Delhi Administration Vs. Sushil Kumar, reported in (1996) 11 SCC 605. The apex court has observed in Sushil Kumar that recalling of the appointment for the material suppression in the attestation form was justified. Mr. Majumder, learned Govt. Advocate has relied on another decision of the apex court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Bipad Bhanjan Gayen, reported in (2008) 11 SCC 314, where, almost in an identical situation, the apex court has denied to interfere with the judgment of the High Court which had ratified the action of the State, terminating service on the premises of suppression of the material information in the attestation form. Even though the petitioner has been discharged from the criminal case, his plea of taking back in the service was not acceded to. Mr. Majumder, learned Govt. Advocate has further submitted that similarly the law is restated by the apex court in Commissioner of Police, New Delhi & Anr. Vs. Mehar Singh etc., reported in (2013) 7 SCC 685.