Point of Law: Court cannot lose sight of fact that today employment opportunities are scarce commodity in our country. Every advertisement invites large number of aspirants for limited number of vacancies.

ORDER :

The instant petition after amendment has been filed by the petitioner for the grant of following substantive reliefs:

i. That appropriate writ, order or direction may very kindly be issued and the impugned communication (Annexure P-3) dated 09.09.2022 may very kindly be quashed and set aside by further directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner for the post of General Duty Constable (Male) with all consequential benefits of pay, arrear, seniority from the same date when his juniors in the selection process get the same in the interest of law and justice.

ii. That appropriate writ, order or direction may very kindly be issued and the appointment offered to respondent No.4 may very kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of law and justice and in the alternative if the respondents want to accommodate him also then petitioner be given all financial benefits from the date he alongwith the other junior persons of the petitioner have been sent for training, alongwith interest @ 9% per annum.

iia. That appropriate writ, order, direction may very kindly be issued and clause 19.2 of Recruitment & Promotion Rules dated 05.08.2021 may very kindly be quashed and set aside being violative of various judgments pronounced by this Hon'ble Court, as also the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the interest of law and justice.

2. The respondents on 10.9.2021 issued recruitment notice for filling up the posts of 1334 Constables, out of which, 103 posts of Constables, were allocated to District Sirmour. The petitioner being eligible applied for the same and after qualifying the written as well as physical test was directed to undergo medical examination, wherein he was declared fully fit.

3. Thereafter, after verifying the antecedents, the respondents on the basis of a case, which was registered against the petitioner, vide FIR No.113/2019 dated 20.11.2019, under Sections 297, 34 and 323 IPC, have kept appointment of the petitioner in abeyance.

4. The respondents have filed reply where they have sought to justify their action of not appointing the petitioner on the ground of his being involved in a criminal case, by placing reliance on Clause-19 of H.P. Govt. Notification dated 5.8.2021 (Recruitment Rules) and Stage-08 of Recruitment Notice dated 10.9.2021.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has duly disclosed the pendency of criminal case while filling up the attestation form for his verification of character and antecedents. Thus, there is no concealment on the part of the petitioner.

7. Now, the moot question is that whether the respondents could have kept the appointment of the petitioner in abeyance on the basis of Clause 19 or not.