SATPAL YADAV Vs. UOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The instant writ petition has been filed for seeking direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for appointment on the post of Constable (General Duty) in BSF and provide appointment with all consequential benefits.

(2.) AS per facts of the case, in pursuance of advertisement issued by respondents for filing up the post of Constable (General Duty), petitioner being eligible applied for recruitment. In the selection process, petitioner was declared successful but respondents denied appointment to the petitioner for the reason that he was convicted for the offence of Section 341, 323/34 IPC at Police station Chirawa.

(3.) IT is pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking into consideration the facts of Sandeep Kumar case observed that involvement in criminal case is probably not mentioned due to fear that if he did so, he would automatically be disqualified therefore, denial of appointment is not proper, if offences are not related with moral turpitude. Following adjudication was made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sandeep Kumar (Supra): - -