ORDER

1. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

"It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition; and further be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 21.12.2018; and further be pleased to direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Constable in pursuance to his selection in the Constable recruitment-2018 with all consequential benefits.

Any other order/direction/relief which this Hon'ble Court deems proper in the facts and circumstances of this case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner along with cost."

2. Brief facts of the case are that an advertisement dated 25.05.2018 was issued by the respondents holding selection for the post of Constable, pursuant to which the petitioner applied and after participating in the selection process was found to be a successful candidate. However, the respondents denied appointment to the petitioner on the ground that a criminal case for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 324, 325 & 336 of IPC was registered against him, in which after trial though he has been acquitted by the competent court of jurisdiction giving him the benefit of doubt but his acquittal is not an honourable acquittal, therefore he is not entitled for appointment and accordingly rejected his candidature vide order dated 21.12.2018.

3. Grievance of the petitioner by way of filing the present writ petition is that the criminal case in which the petitioner has been acquitted by the trial court giving him the benefit of doubt does not pertain to moral turpitude or violence against the State, which could come in his way in seeking appointment for the post in question and therefore he is entitled for appointment.

4. Counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the pleadings made in the writ petition submitted that the respondents have denied appointment to the petitioner even despite having been acquitted in the criminal case registered against him which is not of the moral turpitude.

5. In support of his contention, counsel relied upon the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in the matter of Hanuman Gurjar Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.890/2019 & other connected petitions decided on 12.03.2019).

6. Counsel further submitted that the said order dated 12.03.2019 (supra) came to be challenged at the instance of the State of Rajasthan before the Division Bench of this Court by way of D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1525/2019 along with other connected appeal which was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.01.2020, which was assailed by the State of Rajasthan before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing SLP No.9425/2020 and that too was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 24.08.2020 and counsel further submitted that in this fact situation, the present writ petition deserves to be allowed and the respondents be directed to give appointment to the petitioner.

7. Counsel for the respondents while opposing the writ petition submitted that although the petitioner was acquitted by the learned trial court in the alleged criminal case, which was pending against him, but the acquittal was not an honorable acquittal and therefore the respondents vide order dated 21.12.2018 rightly rejected candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Constable. Counsel further submitted that otherwise also since the recruitment relates to the appointment for the post of Constable and that being the disciplined security force, therefore after carefully examining the question whether in the facts and circumstances the petitioner is fit to be retained in the security forces or not, the respondents took a conscious for denial of appointment to the petitioner on the post of Constable.

8. In support of his contention, counsel relied upon the judgment passed by the Division Be