Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Bharat Kumar Sansi S/o Shri Bheru Lal Sansi – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
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 de
Acquittal in criminal cases does not automatically guarantee employment; discretion in hiring must consider the nature of the offence and circumstances of the acquittal.
Acquittal in criminal cases does not guarantee employment; employers can consider a candidate's criminal history when making hiring decisions.
The main legal point established is that pending criminal cases, especially those involving grave moral turpitude, can justify the denial of appointment to government service, in accordance with the ....
The court emphasized that reliance on superseded circulars for denying employment based on pending criminal cases is erroneous, requiring objective assessment of each candidate's suitability.
A candidate's truthful disclosure of a pending criminal case does not justify denial of appointment if there is no evidence of concealment or misrepresentation.
An acquittal in a case involving personal disputes does not disqualify an individual from government employment, reinforcing the principle of equality in public service opportunities.
The court established that mere involvement in a criminal case does not automatically disqualify a candidate for government service; a detailed examination of moral implications is necessary.
Mere pendency of a criminal case does not disqualify a candidate for public service if the allegations are trivial and disclosed during the application process.
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
