KISHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged by means of this writ petition the order passed by the Principal, Government College, Banner dated June 30, 1972 dismissing the petitioner from Government service.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially employed as a class IV employee in the office of the Collector, Barmer on November 4, 1966. The service of the petitioner was subsequently transferred on his own request to the Government College, Barmer, by the order of the Collector, Barmer dated March 7, 1976. Later on, the petitioner was confirmed on the post of class IV employee by order dated May 5, 1568 with effect from March, 1, 1965. While the petitioner was working as class IV employee at the Government College, Banner, a complaint was received against him to the effect that he suppressing the information that be was apprehended at Luni Railway Junction for carrying opium on March 11, 1960 and in that case he was convicted by the Court of the Railway Magistrate, Jodhpur on September 7, 1960 and was sentenced to I year's imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/ - and in default of payment of fine he was to undergo 6 months further imprisonment. A notice was issued by the Principal of the Government College, Barmer to the petitioner on January 12, 1970 calling upon him to show cause whether he was convicted in the opium case. The petitioner in reply to this notice neither admitted nor denied the fact of his conviction on a criminal charge under the Opium Act, but he merely stated that since his employment, his conduct as well as work have been sati factory and that the State Government has made provision in the rules for giving employment to ex -convicts, as such no action should he taken against the petitioner. Thereafter, another notice Ex. 2 was issued by the Principal, Government College, Barmer to the petitioner on February 3, 1971 by which he was again directed to admit or deny the feet of his alleged conviction in an opium case in which he was sentenced to one year's imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/ - and in default of payment of fine of 6 months' further imprisonment. But again in his reply, the petitioner did not give a specific answer to the question as to whether he has so convicted or not. Thus the petitioner failed to specifically admit or deny the allegation of his conviction and also failed to inform the principal as to whether he has undergone the sentence awarded to him. After the receipt of this notice, the petitioner give a long detailed reply on February 3, 1971 but still he failed to answer the question posed to him about his conviction on a criminal charge before he was employed in Government service. The petitioner took the stand that without prejudice and without proceeding to answer the question asked, mere conviction could not be regarded as a disqualification. The petitioner still maintained that the complaint was false, as a person who had been convicted and has undergone some sentence, according to the policy of the State Government, was not barred from employment.

(3.) AS the petitioner continued to give evasive replies, the Principal, Government College, Barmer relief upon the information supplied to him by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur by his letter dated April 22, 1972 (Ex. R/1) and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was convicted of a criminal charge under Section 9 of the Opium Act and he was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/ -. Treating the conviction of the petitioner as prima facie evidence of mis -conduct and in absence of any extenuating circumstances having been shown on the part of the petitioner, the Principal, by his order dated June 30, 1972 held that no departmental enquiry under Section 16 of the C.C.A. Rubs was required to be made and the petitioner was dismissed from Government service on the ground of mis -conduct which led to his conviction on the aforesaid criminal charge. The petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the order dated April 18, 1974. Thereafter the present writ petition was filed and the petitioner reproduced in the writ petition a character certificate from the Superintendent of Police, Barmer dated June 29, 1972 and a character certificate of Inspector General of Prisons, Rajasthan, Jaipur dated May 29, 1973 in which the fact of conviction on a criminal charge and awarding of sentence to the petitioner as a result thereof was affirmed and it was stated that during the course of stay at General Jail. Jodhpur, the petitioner's conduct was satisfactory.