Acquittal in criminal cases does not automatically guarantee employment; discretion in hiring must consider the nature of the offence and circumstances of the acquittal.

ORDER :

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved of the action of the respondent authorities in not permitting him to join his duties on the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-I) in pursuance to the appointment order dated 18.02.2019 (Annex.7) issued by the respondent No.4 - Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer.

2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are the petitioner pursued the BSTC Course in the year 2012 and thereafter he qualified the Rajasthan Teachers Eligibility Examination, 2015. The respondentNo.2-Director, Directorate of Elementary Education and Panchayati Raj (Elementary Education), Rajasthan, Bikaner issued the advertisement No.1/2018 dated 12.04.2018 for recruitment on the posts of Teacher Grade-III (Level-I) (Non-TSP Area). The petitioner, who belongs to Scheduled Caste category and is otherwise fully eligible and qualified for the advertised post, applied for the same. He participated in the recruitment process successfully and was allotted District Barmer for appointment/posting. The document verification of the petitioner was done on 23.06.2018 and he was declared eligible for appointment on the post, in furtherance whereof the respondentNo.4 Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer issued the order dated 18.02.2019 (Annex.7) providing him appointment on the post of teacher Grade-III (Level-I) (General Education) and he was given posting at the Government Upper Primary School, Senwaron Ka Tala, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer.

3. As per condition No.3 of the appointment order dated18.02.2019, a candidate was required to produce a police verification certificate issued by the competent police officer of the concerned area regarding pendency of no criminal case against him and his good and clean character. It is worthwhile to mention here that a matrimonial dispute was going on between the petitioner and his wife, due to which the wife lodged FIRNo.51/2012 at the Police Station Mahila Thana, Ajmer against the petitioner and his family members for the offences under Section 498-A and 406 of the IPC, wherein after investigation a charge- sheet came to be filed against the petitioner and the matter was under trial at the time of issuance of the appointment order. In addition to that, proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 were also pending against the petitioner. The report issued by the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara had mention of the above case and thus, owing to pendency of criminal case, the petitioner was not allowed to join duties and therefore, he has approached this court through the instant writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the present writ petition, trial of the case under Section 498-A and 406 of the IPC has been completed and vide judgment dated 24.09.2024, the petitioner and his mother have been acquitted from the charge honourably. He further submits that application under Section 12 read with Section 18, 19, 20, 21 and 23 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 filed by the petitioner's wife has also been rejected by the trial court vide judgment dated 16.10.2024. Learned counsel submits that both the aforesaid cases have been decided on their merits and it is a case of clean acquittal and thus, there remains no hurdle in appointment of the petitioner on the post for which he has been duly selected.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents is not present to argue the matter. A detailed reply to the writ petition has been filed, which has been taken into consideration while adjudicating the instant writ petition.

6. It is averred in the reply that the respondents were absolutely justified in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner on the basis of the police verification report and pendency of criminal case against him. It is further averred that in view of