Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
ARUN MONGA
Kuljeet Singh S/o Late Shri Rajendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
Kuljeet Singh S/o Late Shri Rajendra Singh – Respondent
ORDER :
ARUN MONGA, J.
1. While serving as Gram Sewak-Village Development Officer (‘VDO’), petitioner’s father died in harness on 08.05.2022. Being dependent son of the deceased Gram Sewak, he seeks benefit of the compassionate appointment policy. However, vide the impugned letter dated 19.09.2022 (Annexure-9), it was informed that since there is a pending criminal case against him in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur, arising out of an FIR No.92/2016 dated 29.06.2016 for offences under Sections 341, 323, and 143 of the IPC, he is ineligible for government employment and that his claim will be considered after conclusion of the Court case. Hence the instant petition.
2. The facts leading to this writ petition are; being one of the dependents of the deceased government employee, petitioner submitted an application dated 15.06.2022 for appointment on compassionate grounds, along with the required documents.
2.1. During the pendency of his aforesaid application, one Jasvinder Singh complained vide his letter dated 31.05.2022 that petitioner cannot be granted appointment due to the pending FIR (criminal case arising there from) against him, as noted above. Jasvinder Singh
The mere pendency of a criminal case does not automatically disqualify a candidate for compassionate appointment; each case must be assessed on its own merits.
Suppression of criminal case information does not automatically disqualify compassionate appointment; objective evaluation required.
The rejection of a candidate's appointment based solely on a pending criminal case, without considering the nature of the allegations or the application form's requirements, is arbitrary and unsustai....
The mere pendency of a criminal case not involving moral turpitude cannot justify denial of appointment, emphasizing the need for contextual evaluation of character and offences.
Trivial offenses post-acquittal do not automatically render a candidate unfit for employment, allowing discretion in public employment decisions.
The concealment of a pending criminal case during the employment application process can justify termination of services, as integrity and character are critical for positions within the judicial sys....
The court emphasized that reliance on superseded circulars for denying employment based on pending criminal cases is erroneous, requiring objective assessment of each candidate's suitability.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
