PREMA RAM DUKIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's name for appointment in pursuance of the advertisement dated 7.4.2008 with all consequential benefits. As per facts of the case, in pursuance of the advertisement for filing up posts of Constable (Driver) the petitioner being eligible applied for recruitment. The petitioner being eligible applied for recruitment. The petitioner as allowed to appear in the written examination, in which, he was declared successful. Thereafter, he was called for interview. After appearing in the interview, the petitioner was not provided appointment because upon verification roll sent to the concerned Police Station Kuchera (District Nagaur) although the S.H.O. of the police station Kuchera certified that the petitioner is having good reputation and he is not addict of any drug, so also, his conduct is also found to be good, but, the S.H.O. mentioned in the verification roll that an FIR was registered against the petitioner bearing No. 38/2005; in the said case, the petitioner was acquitted for offence under Section 341, however, for offence under Section 323/ 34, I.P.C., the petitioner was released on probation.

(2.) After completion of the selection process, the petitioner was not provided appointment by the respondents and, upon inquiry, no information was given to the petitioner. Upon the petitioner's representation to enquire the correct facts, it is verbally informed to the petitioner that due to aforesaid criminal case, for which, no information was given by the petitioner the respondents denied appointment to the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner while inviting my attention towards recent judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Civil Appeal No. (s) 1430/2007, Commissioner of Police and Ors. vs. Sandeep Kumar, decided on 17.3.2011, submits that in identical situation, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that for such type of reasons the appointment should not be denied, therefore, it is prayed that as per recent verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, denial of appointment to the petitioner for the reason that a criminal case was registered against the petitioner for Offences under Sections 341 and 323/ 34, I.P.C., in which, the petitioner was released on probation, did not come in way of the petitioner to get employment under the State.