The main legal point established in the judgment is the consequences of concealing material facts and the voluntariness of the petitioners' applications to work in RPF as Constables in Kashmir Valley, leading to their retention in RPF.

JUDGMENT :

“For many centuries Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e. “satya” (truth) and “ahimsa” (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral part of the justice-delivery system which was in vogue in the pre-Independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-Independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. The materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings.

In the last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.”

These observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in ‘Dalip Singh v. State of U.P., (2010) 2 SCC 114’, hold good in this case as well, as the petitioners (except the petitioner No.86) have concealed from this court, the material fact of submitting applications with the respondents demonstrating their voluntariness/willingness to work at their home turf but with certain sacrifices.

1. After having successfully participated in the selection process undertaken for the recruitment of Constables in Railway Protect Special Force (hereinafter referred to as “RPSF”), the petitioners came to be appointed as Constables in RPSF. After rendering ten years of service, the petitioners were promoted to the rank of Head Constables in RPSF with effect from 1st July, 2004.

2. The Railway Board accorded sanction for the creation of 252 additional non-gazetted posts of Railway Protection Force (hereinafter referred to as “the RPF”) for USBRL between Qazigund-Baramulla, as the said section was likely to be operationalized soon.

3. Vide communication dated 31st March, 2008, the Divisional Security Commissioner/RPF, Northern Railway, Ferozpur Cantt. addressed to the Assistant Security Commissioner/RPF, Amritsar, Jalandhar & Jammu Tawi, sought the names of the serving staff willing to work in Qazigund-Baramulla Section for onward forwarding to Headquarter office for further necessary action. In addition to that, the list of Constables (below the age of 40 years) and Head Constables (below the age of 50 years), who had completed their tenure and were due for transfer during the general transfer-2008, was also sought.

4. Vide communication dated 9th May, 2008, the transfer of 225 RPSF personnel was approved by the respondent No.2 subject to the condition that they would figure at bottom seniority of their batch-mates in feeder categories and no request for posting elsewhere shall be entertained.

5. As is evident from communication dated 25th June, 2008, the transfer of 124 RPSF personnel was approved by the respondent No.2. By virtue of Force Orders bearing No.16/FZR/2008, 18/FZR/2008, 29/ FZR/2008, 31/FZR/2008, 35/FZR/2008, 46/FZR/2008 and 79/FZR/ 2008, the RPSF personnel, who were transferred to the Northern Railway on the bottom of seniority of their counterparts in the feeder categories, were posted at various locations mentioned in the aforesaid orders.

6. The colour given to the claim projected by the petitioners in the present writ petition is that pursuant to the orders dated 9th May 2008, 23rd May, 2008 and 25th June, 2008, the petitioners were not only reverted from the post of Head Constable to the post of Constable but were also reduced in orde