ORDER :

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 21.09.2020 whereby he has been dismissed from the services by invoking powers under Rule 19 of The Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 1958').

2. The facts narrated briefly are that the petitioner was appointed as Teacher Gr.II on 01.07.1995, whereafter he was promoted as Lecturer (Hindi). During the course of his employment an FIR for offences under Section 34 1, 323, 325/34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE being FIR No. 312/2008 came to be registered against him on 29.12.2008.

3. On 14.07.2020, a disciplinary inquiry was initiated against the petitioner essentially for the reason that the petitioner had not disclosed the factum of registration of the FIR and pendency of criminal case against him. A memorandum of charges framing two charges was served on the petitioner.

4. The petitioner filed a reply to the disciplinary proceedings and submitted that he has neither concealed any fact nor had he made misrepresentation.

5. Before the disciplinary proceedings could advance, the petitioner has been dismissed from the services vide order dated 21.09.2020 by the respondent No. 2 while exercising powers under Rule 19 of the Rules of 1958. The order of petitioner's dismissal records that as the petitioner has been convicted vide order dated 10.01.2020 passed by the Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Merta for the offence under Section 34 1, 323, 325/34 of the IPC, his continuation in the service is undesirable.

6. Oppugning the order dated 21.09.2020, the present writ petition has been preferred. A Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an interim order in petitioner's favour on 05.10.2020 and accordingly, the impunged order dated 21.09.2020 dismissing petitioner from the services has been kept in abyeance.

7. The petitioner is continuing his services per force the interim order passed by this Court.

8. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of conviction dated 10.01.2020 and during the pendency of the present writ petition, learned Sessions Judge, Merta per-viam his order dated 24.02.2022 has set aside the petitioner's sentence and has given him benefit of section 4 of The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1958').

9. The petitioner has placed on record the order dated 24.02.2022, passed by the appellate Court alongwith additional affidavit and prayed that the order impugned be quashed and set aside on the solitary ground that the conviction has been set aside.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the order impugned is against the principles of natural justice as no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner. While iterating that disciplinary proceedings have already been initiated against the petitioner, he argued that, there was no reason for not proceeding with the inquiry and dismissing him from the services, particularly when neither the offence was committed during the course of employment nor did it amount to moral turpitude.

11. Without prejudice to above he argued that petitioner's dismissal deserves to be set aside on sole count that the conviction itself has been set aside and benefit of Section 4 of the Act of 1958 has been given and consequently the disqualification (if any) attached to the conviction has ceased to exist.

12. Mr. Solanki, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgments passed in the case of Sube Singh Yadav v. State & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ No. 13452/2012, decided on 30.11.2018, Amit Singh Rathi v. State & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2205/2021, decided on 10.03.2