The court established that a convict's release on probation should not impede their professional advancement, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.

JUDGMENT :

ARUN MONGA, J.

1. Grievance of the petitioner herein inter alia is against an order dated 21.02.2023 (Annex.10), vide which, his result was kept in a sealed cover for promotion to the post of Vice Principal against the vacancies of the year 2022-2023. Further, he prays that the respondents be directed to promote the petitioner from the date, the persons junior to him have been so promoted with all consequential benefits.

2. Relevant facts of the case as pleaded by petitioner are that while he was serving on the post of Lecturer (Hindi), vide judgment/order dated 10.01.2020 (Annex.1), he was convicted for the offence under Sections 341, 323 & 325/34 IPC by the learned trial court.

2.2 The petitioner duly intimated the department about his conviction and suspension of sentence to the Principal.

2.3 On 14.07.2020, a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (‘the Rules of 1958’) charging him of not disclosing the information about his conviction for the offences under Sections 341, 323 & 325/34 IPC.

2.4 The petitioner submitted reply to the aforesaid charge-sheet.

2.5 However, vide order dated 21.09.2020 (Annex.6), the petitioner’s services were terminated on account of his conviction exercising the power conferred under Rule 19 of the Rules of 1958.

2.6 Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred SBCWP No.10281/2020 before this Court, wherein the impugned termination order was stayed vide order dated 05.10.2020 (Annex.7).

2.7. Against his conviction, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Merta. Vide an order dated 24.02.2022 (Annex.8), learned Sessions Judge though upheld the conviction, but granted benefit of probation under section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. It was also categorically stated that the same will not adversely affect the services of the petitioner. Vide application dated 14.03.2022 (Annex.9), the petitioner informed about the Sessions Court decision dated 24.02.2022.

2.8. Notwithstanding, the respondents when initiated promotion process, the result of the petitioner for promotion was kept in a sealed cover vide order dated 21.02.2023 (Annex.10).

3. Defence taken by the respondents in their reply inter alia is that it is admitted position that the petitioner was issued charge-sheet/memorandum of charges dated 14.7.2020 under Rule 16 of the Rules, 1958. The trial court passed the judgment dated 10.01.2020, whereby the petitioner was held guilty of offences u/s 341, 323, 325 read with Section 34 IPC. Therefore, by an order dated 21.09.2020, petitioner's services were terminated. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief from this Court.

3.1 Against the order dated 21.09.2020, petitioner filed C.W. No.10281/2020, in which, this Court has stayed the termination order dated 21.9.2020 vide an interim order dated 5.10.2020. Aforesaid writ petition is still pending and it has not been decided on merits. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

4. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also perused the case file.

5. Before adverting to the merits of the claim of the petitioner qua the promotion through his second foray before this Court, it is pertinent to note that the withholding of the same is a consequence of criminal proceedings earlier initiated against him vide an FIR (C.I.S.) No. 1396/2014 under Sections 341, 323, 325/34 of the IPC and one has to necessarily, therefore, take into consideration the outcome thereof.

6. It transpires that the petitioner was originally convicted by the trial court, but the appellate court, taking a lenient view qua his role attributed as well as on the concession of the appellant, though upheld the conviction but keeping in view the reformative approach gave benefit of Sections 4 & 12 of the Act of 1958 and released the petitioner on probation.

7. In this context reference may be had to an