Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Vijendra Prasad Sisodiya, S/o. Raghuveer Prasad Sisodiya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the petitioner's case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the impact of criminal charges. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis on qualifications and acquittal effects. (Para 7) |
| 4. legal standards of moral turpitude in public employment. (Para 8) |
| 5. conclusion directing reinstatement of the petitioner. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
FARJAND ALI, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction for the respondents to allow him to join on the post of Lecturer (School Education).
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that vide advertisement dated 13.04.2018 applications were invited from eligibile and desirous candidates for appointment on the post of Lecturer (Sechool Education) in different subjects including Political Science. The petitioner possessing the requisite qualifications applied for the post in the subject Political Science. The respondents vide corrigendum dated 19.09.2019 re-advertised the post of Lecturer (School Education), however, the candidates who had applied earlier were not required to apply again. The petitioner participated in the selection process a
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.
Acquittal in criminal cases does not guarantee employment; employers can consider a candidate's criminal history when making hiring decisions.
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 automatically disqualify a candidate for employment; character assessments must consider the nature of offences and the presumption of innocence.
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The court emphasized that reliance on superseded circulars for denying employment based on pending criminal cases is erroneous, requiring objective assessment of each candidate's suitability.
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.
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
