UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. AVTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Union of India and its officers have filed the instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent against the judgment dated 3.2.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition holding that the order dated 24.8.1995 (P-1) does not disclose any reason for termination of the services of the petitioner-respondent. The learned Single Judge has further found the order dated 24.4.1996 (P-9), passed by the Appellate Authority rejecting his appeal as non-speaking. The learned Single Judge has also observed that on 24.8.1994 when the petitioner-respondent was enlisted as a Constable in Central Reserve Police Force as well as on 9.12.1994 when he filled the verification form, no case was pending against him as he had already been acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Una (Himachal Pradesh), vide judgment dated 2.5.1994, which has been upheld up to Hon'ble the Supreme Court. Therefore, the learned Single Judge is of the view that the services of the petitioner-respondent could not have been terminated on the ground of non-disclosure of information/suppression of facts in the Verification Roll.

(2.) The facts are not in dispute. On 24.8.1994, the petitioner-respondent was enlisted as Constable (GD) in the C.R.P.F., Pinjore. On 27.8.1994 he reported for duty. On 9.12.1994, the petitioner-respondent filled his 'Verification Roll', which was sent to the Deputy Commissioner, Una (H.P.) for verification of character and antecedents of the petitioner-respondents and to determine his suitability for Government service, vide letter dated 31.1.1995. On 23.5.1995, the Deputy Commissioner, Una (H.P.) intimated that a case FIR No. 356, dated 28.10.1992, under Sections 323, 324/34 IPC, Police Station Una, was registered against the petitioner-respondent and pending before the Court. On the basis of the said report, his services were terminated by the Additional DIGP, GC, CRPF, Pinjore, vide order dated 24.8.1995 (P-1). Against the order dated 24.8.1995, the petitioner-respondent preferred an appeal (P-3). In para (iii) of the appeal while admitting the factum of pendency of a criminal case against him, it was pointed out by him that the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Una, acquitted him in the said case by his judgment dated 2.5.1994 (P-2). He further pleaded that on the date of his enlistment in the C.R.P.F. no police/court case was pending against him. Thus, he denied that he has concealed anything in the verification and character antecedents roll. On 24.4.1996, the DIGP, CRPF, Chandigarh, passed an order and found that the termination order was in order (P-9). Challenging the aforementioned orders dated 24.8.1995 (P-1) and 24.4.1996 (P-9) the petitioner-respondent approached this Court by filing CWP No. 9550 of 1996, which has been allowed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment dated 3.2.2010.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the paper book with their able assistance we are of the considered view that there is merit in the instant appeal and the same deserves to succeed. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants has produced photocopy of the 'Verification Roll', which was filled by the petitioner-respondent on 9.12.1994, which is taken on record as Mark 'A'. A perusal of the 'Verification Roll', which is both in English and Hindi language, contains the following 'Warning' in the beginning :