Acquittal in criminal cases does not automatically disqualify a candidate for employment; character assessments must consider the nature of offences and the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

Arun Monga, J.

1. Acquitted of all charges qua offences allegedly committed by petitioner when he was a young boy of 19 years, he is before this Court assailing an order dated 02.01.2024 (Annex.7), vide which, his candidature for the post of Teacher Gr.III, was rejected by the respondents on the ground that his antecedents were not found satisfactory, as he was involved in multiple criminal cases registered under Sections 147, 323, 332, 336, 341, 353, 427, 504 & 34 of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case first. Petitioner is a Graduate having Degree in Science and thereafter enrolled in B.Ed course in year 2014. The requisite educational qualification for the purpose of appearing in the REET examination for Level-II was Graduation Degree and B.Ed. The petitioner took the Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teachers -2022 (REET) examination and qualified the same with 84% marks in the Level-II for the subjects of Science/Maths.

2.1. Respondent No.2 issued an Advertisement dated 16.12.2022 (Annex.1) for the post of Teacher Grade-III Level-II (Subject Science/Maths). Total 5,678 posts were advertised for the Non- TSP area and 1,030 posts were meant for TSP area. As per the advertisement, the last date of filling up the application forms was 19.01.2023. Petitioner being eligible submitted his online application form. Written examination/MCQ for recruitment to the said post was conducted on 25.02.2023, wherein the petitioner secured 193.4677 marks. Thereafter, a provisional select list dated 07.06.2023 (Annex.4) was issued and petitioner was declared successful for the purpose of document verification.

2.2. Petitioner participated in the document verification process and got his documents verified. Respondents issued an office order dated 23.09.2023 whereby a list of shortlisted candidates was published for the purpose of making recommendation to for appointments. Petitioner’s name was in merit list dated 23.09.2023 (Annex.5). Thereafter, the respondent department issued an order dated 26.09.2023 (Annex.6), whereby the shortlisted candidates were allotted the districts as per their merit and preference. Name of the petitioner was mentioned at Sr. No.2561 and he was allotted District Chittorgarh.

2.3. The petitioner was called for the counseling and upon completion of the same he was allotted Government Upper Primary School, Kalyanpura, Mungana, Tehsil Kapasan, District Chittorgarh for taking the charge as Teacher Grade-III, Level-II. However, the respondents did not allow the petitioner to join the services at the aforesaid place. Upon enquiring, the petitioner came to know that the Police Verification Report of the petitioner WAS found negative. A clarification was sought from the Directorate, Bikaner. Thereafter, respondent District Education Officer issued impugned order dated 02.01.2024 (Annex.7) stating therein that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents, therefore, in pursuance of the circular dated 04.12.2019, he is not eligible for appointment. His candidature was thus cancelled. Petitioner submitted his representations (Annex.10 collectively) mentioning all the facts and circumstances. But the same have not been considered by the respondents till date. Hence this petition.

3. The relevant stand taken by the respondents in their reply is as below:-

3.1. It is not in dispute that the petitioner secured 193.4677 marks in the examination concerned, got selected, and was allotted a school in the Chittorgarh district, as mentioned in the writ petition itself. However, four criminal cases were registered against the petitioner. All the allegations levelled in the criminal cases against the petitioner are very grievous in nature. It is is settled law that mere disclosure of the alleged offences and the result of the trial is not sufficient, and the employer cannot be compelled to give appointment to any such candidate, also during probation, if the department finds that the services of any employee are not in the interest o