SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Raj) 142

(Rajasthan High Court)
Jaipur Bench
Kamal Singh Meena Vs. Union of India & Ors. (Sharma, J.)
HON'BLE ALOK SHARMA, J.
Kamal Singh Meena
Versus
Union of India & Ors.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10108 of 2015, decided on 29.03.2016

Advocates Appeared
Kawal Singh Loha, for Petitioner;
Shailesh Prakash Sharma, for Respondents;
S.P. Singh on behalf of Inderjeet Singh, AAG, for State

Headnote:Service Matters — Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987, Rule 52.2 and 67.2 read with Penal Code, Sec. 148, 323, 323/149, 324, 341 and Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, Sec. 12 — Discharged from training after recruited as Constable on having been suppressing and not set out facts that he was under trial — Petitioner acquitted in a criminal trial based on compromise/the complainant and his witnesses turning hostile evidencing falsity of the case — Held — It could not even entailed his being found unsuitable for government service in view of reasons analogous to Sec. 12 of the Act of 1958 — An irrelevant misstatement of fact cannot result in the decleration of an applicant as unsuitable for government service — Order set-aside. (Paras 18 to 20)

       Petition allowed.

        lsok lEcU/kh ekeys & jsyos lqj{kk cy fu;e] 1987] fu;e 52-2 vkSj 67-2 lifBr n.M lafgrk] /kkjk 148] 323] 323@149] 324] 341 vkSj vijk/kh ifjoh{kk vf/kfu;e] 1958] /kkjk 12 & ,d vkj{kh ds :i esa bl vk'k; ds rF;ksa dks fNikus vkSj mYys[k ugha djus ij fd og U;k;ky; esa fopkjk/khu Fkk] mls HkrhZ ds ckn izf'k{k.k ls fueqZDr fd;k & jkthukek@izdj.k dh >wBh lk{; nsdj ifjoknh vkSj mlds lk{khx.k i{knzksgh gq, & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & 1958 ds vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 12 ds vuq:i dkj.kksa dh n`f"V ls mlds ljdkjh lsok gsrq vuqi;qDr ik;s tkus ij ;g ckr dgh Bgj Hkh ugha ldrh Fkh & rF; dk dksbZ vlaxr feF;k dFku fdlh izkFkhZ dh ljdkjh lsok gsrq vuqi;qDr ds :i esa ?kks"k.kk esa ifjf.kr ugha gks ldrk & vkns'k vikLr fd;kA

       ;kfpdk Lohdkj dhA ¼in la[;k 18 ls 20½

       

Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 19.06.2015, passed by the Additional Chief Security Commissioner, Northeast Frontier Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati whereby he has been discharged from training after being recruited as a Constable in the Railway Protection Special Force (hereinafter “RPSF”) for the purported reason of his character and antecedent verification exercise eliciting information from the D.M., Alwar that Police Case No.119/07 for offences under Sections 143, 323, 324, 341 IPC was instituted against him at Kotkashim Police Station and he was under trial therefor. It was further stated in the impugned order that the aforesaid fact, having been suppressed and not set out in the Attestation Form submitted by the petitioner, entailed violation of para No.3 of the Attestation Form consequent to which he was rendered unfit for Government service as per Rule 52.2 & 67.2 of Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 (hereinafter “the Rules of 1987”) and liable to be discharged with immediate effect.

2. The facts not in dispute are that the petitioner was selected to the post of Constable in RPSF and called up for training vide letter dated 05.10.2014 which he joined on 01.11.2014. Four months thereafter on or about 25.05.2015, the petitioner was served a letter requiring him to report to Headquarter of 4th Battalion, RPSF, New Jalpaiguri for further orders. The petitioner thereafter by the impugned order dated 19.07.2015 was discharged from service.

3. What now transpires from the petition is that a criminal case No.53/2009 (FIR No.119/2007) was registered at Police Station Kotkashim whereunder the petitioner along with his family members was made an accused for alleged offences u/Secs. 143, 323, 324, 341 IPC resulting from an altercation in front of his house. On completion of investigation, the petitioner was challaned for offences under Secs. 148, 323-323/149, 324, 341 IPC as were others. The incident apparently being one between two groups in the village, the criminal case was compromised qua offences under Secs. 341 and 323 IPC. In the course of trial for the remainder offences, all prosecution witnesses including the complainant himself turned hostile and refused to regurgitate their case and in fact totally disavowed it. Consequently, the petitioner and other were acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 06.04.2010.

4. Thereafter on applications being invited for recruitment to the post of Constable in RPSF the petitioner applied, was selected and called for training. The petitioner in the process of selection was also required to fill up an Attestation Form for verification of his character and antecedents. The Attestation Form indeed cautioned that the furnishing of false information or suppression of any factual information would be a disqualification and likely to render the candidate unfit for employment under the Government. Clause 12(?) of the Attestation Form required the applicant to state as to whether he had ever been prosecuted, Clause 12(?) whether the applicant had earlier been fined by a Court of Law, Clause 12(?) whether the applicant had earlier convicted by any Court of Law for an offence and Clause 12(?) whether any criminal case was pending against the applicant at the time of filling up the Attestation Form. The petitioner's response was negative (no) to all the aforesaid questions.

5. On the RPSF requiring the District Magistrate, Alwar, wherefrom the petitioner hails, to verify the contents disclosed in the Attestation Form by the petitioner, he informed the respondents-Railways vide his letter dated 31.03.2015 that the petitioner was suffering a criminal trial, following a “challan” resulting from investigation in the FIR No.119/2007 dated 26.07.2007 for offences under Section 143, 323, 324, 341 IPC. This report from the District Magistrate, Alwar entailed a conclusion























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top