GAJANAND MEENA Vs. UOI & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under challenge in this writ petition is the order dated 10.6.2015 passed by Chief Security Commissioner/Railway Protection Force, North-Western Railways, Railway Protection Force, Jaipur and order dated 11.6.1995 passed by Assistant Security Com-missioner-cum-Assistant Principal, Railway Protection Force Training Centre, Bandikui.

(2.) The first of the above orders was sent to the Principal, RPF Training Centre, Bandikui conveying that the petitioner, who was undergoing training with them, has secured appointment as Constable by giving false information and concealing the material facts and, therefore, has been declared disqualified to continue as Constable by the competent authority. Second order, which is consequential, has been passed by Assistant Security Commissioner-cum-Assistant Principal, Railway Protection Force Training Centre, Bandikui discharging the petitioner from training/service.

(3.) As per the pleadings in the memorandum of the writ petition, petitioner is a graduate and belongs to Schedule Tribe. His father is no more alive and he is the only bread earner of his family. He applied for appointment in response to the advertisement issued on 23.2.2011 for the post of Constable in Railway Protection Force. The process of recruitment was divided into three phases; written examination, physical efficiency test and viva-voce and document verification. It was thereafter that the candidates were required to undergo medical examination and training. Petitioner qualified all the aforesaid phases and was called for interview and verification of documents at Chennai where he submitted his requisite documents with the duly filled in attestation form on 29.05.2014. He was then allowed to go for training at Bandikui, which was scheduled to commence from 1.11.2014. When he completed the training of seven months and ten days, he was suddenly debarred from training and was discharged by the impugned order dated 11.6.2015 in compliance of the order dated 10.6.2015 on the ground that he has made wrong declaration in Clause 12 (a) and (b) of the attestation form.