A.B. Chaudhari, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Ms. Deshpande waives service on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 4, and learned Adv. Mr. S.V. Purohit, Adv., for respondent nos. 2 and 3. With the consent of rival parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing.

2. By the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of impugned order dated 15th February, 2014, by which, his selection to the post of Asstt. Electrician was cancelled.

3. In support of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste. He applied for the post pursuant to the advertisement that was issued for filling the vacant posts in the districts of Nagpur, Aurangabad, Jalgaon etc., in the State of Maharashtra on the establishment of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co., Ltd. He applied in the category of Scheduled Caste by making an on-line application on 19th June, 2012. He was called for interview and selection. Having qualified finally, he received a message on his mobile phone on 14th June, 2013 that he was selected to the said post in the category and to remain present at the Zonal Office, Pune, on 20th June, 2013 when he was personally handed over the Letter of Selection. He accordingly went to complete all the formalities on the very next date and the respondent no. 3 on 21st June, 2013 forwarded the letter for verification of character to the Superintendent of Police, Gondia. On 21st October, 2013, respondent no. 2 asked him to submit Police Verification Form etc. He completed all formalities accordingly. During verification, he visited Police Station, Duggipar, Tq. Sadak Arjuni, Distt. Gondia, and he submitted the documents relating to Crime No. 56/2008 under Section 12A of the Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act and judgment of his acquittal dated 15th May, 2011 in the said crime delivered by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sadak Arjuni, in Summary Case No. 2134 of 2009. Acting upon those documents, Superintendent of Police, Gondia, submitted his report on 11th July, 2013 to the respondent no. 3, clearly stating that the petitioner was acquitted on 15th May, 2011. The said report was received by the respondent no. 3 and he issued the impugned order dated 15th February, 2014 cancelling his selection on the same ground that he deliberately concealed the fact in the Attestation Form that no offence was pending against him. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the following decisions to substantiate his arguments:-

[a] T.S. Vasudavan Nair Vs. Director of Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre & others [1988 (Supp) SCC 795],

[b] Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal & another [(1999) 2 SCC 247],

[c] D. Mahadevan Vs. The Director General of Police [(2008) 4 MLJ 88],

[d] The Secretary to Govt., Home Deptt., & two others Vs. P. Ravichandran & another [Division Bench decision dated 17th October, 2005 of Madras High], and

[e] Commissioner of Police Vs. Dhawal Singh [1999 (1) SCC 246].

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 vehemently opposed the Writ Petition and argued, inviting our attention to Clause 11 of the Attestation Form, which provides for disclosure whether the candidate was any time arrested, prosecuted, detained etc., and to that the petitioner did not give any reply when he fully knew that he was prosecuted under Section 12A of the Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act in Summary Case No. 2134 of 2009. The fact that he was acquitted on 15th May, 2011, i.e., before the date of his application for employment on 19th June, 2012 is not relevant, but what is relevant is whether he honestly disclosed about his prosecution in a criminal case and, therefore, this Court need not interfere with the impugned cancellation order. He cited a Division Bench order of this Court at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No. 8388 of 2013, decided on 27th January, 2014 [Coram: