MANISH KUMAR PASWAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Re : I.A. No. 8387 of 2018 After having heard learned counsel for the apellant, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown to condone the delay. Delay is accordingly, condoned and the appeal shall be treated to be within time. Re : L.P.A. No. 1597 of 2018 The present appeal has been filed against an order dated 18.05.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7494 of 2017 by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ application filed by the appellant for setting aside an order dated 04.04.2016 issued by the Deputy Director (Nomination) (respondent No. 3), whereby and whereunder the candidature of the petitioner has been cancelled and he has been debarred from appearing in any examination held by the Staff Selection Commission (hereinafter referred to as the 'SSC') for three years. In the said writ petition a further prayer had been made to direct the respondent to accept his joining after quashing the letter dated 11.04.2017, whereby the offer of appointment issued to the petitioner has been cancelled. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, the appellant has preferred the present intra court appeal.

(2.) It was on the basis of the said letter dated 04.04.2016 (Annexure-7) that the joining of the petitioner was refused vide memorandum of cancellation of offer of appointment dated 11.04.2017 issued from the office of the D.I.G.P., Group Centre, CRPF even though an offer of appointment had been issued to him pursuant to a subsequent selection. Aggrieved by these two orders dated 04.04.2016 and 11.04.2017, the petitioner preferred the writ application giving rise to this appeal. After hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application but while considering the same he has not referred to the subsequent selection pursuant to the advertisement of 2015 which came to form the basis of the present claim of the appellant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the office order dated 04.04.2016 as contained in Annexure-7 is wholly illegal and arbitrary and was never received by the petitioner at any stage nor was any enquiry report which forms the basis of the said order ever communicated to the petitioner nor had he any knowledge about the same. It was rather at the time of joining pursuant to a subsequent letter of offer of appointment, that the respondents have sprung up this wholly arbitrary order, by which he is said to have been debarred from appearing in any examination for a period of three years. It was submitted that in case, there was any incriminating enquiry report against the petitioner, he ought to have been issued a show-cause notice calling him to explain as to why his candidature should not be cancelled, but the respondents never followed any such procedure and have prevented him from joining on the basis of the order dated 04.04.2016 though he was debarred from participating in the SSC examination since 12.05.2013 for three years. The order dated 04.04.2016 has been issued after almost three years of the first examination and even after the petitioner had participated in the subsequent examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus contended that such an action on the part of the respondents smacks of arbitrariness, discrimination and is a fit case that warrants interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He, thus, prayed for a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the orders dated 04.04.2016 and also order dated 11.04.2017 (Annexure-8) and as a consequence thereof, a mandamus to permit the petitioner to join on the post of Constable (GD) in the CRPF as per the earlier offer of appointment.