SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Ganesh Mahato, S/o. Sri Chandreshwar Mahato (Chouhan) – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand through Home Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Government of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
I.A. No. 1999 of 2024
1. The instant application has been filed for condonation of delay of 44 day in filing the present petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
3. In view of reason assigned in the application, the delay in filing the petition is condoned.
4. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1999 of 2024 stands disposed of.
L.P.A. No. 531 of 2018
5. The instant appeal, under clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against order dated 06.07.2018 passed in W.P. (S) No. 52 of 2018 by learned Single Judge whereby and whereunder the writ petition has been dismissed by declining to pass positive direction in favour of writ petitioner.
6. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, reads as under:
7. On 13.01.2004, an advertisement being Advertisement No. 01 of 2004 was published by the State of Jharkhand inviting application for appointment on the post of non-matric police in the Dhanbad District Police Force. The appellant fulfilling all the eligibility criteria submitted application for appointment on the post of non-matric police in Dhanbad District Police Force. The appellant participated in the process of selection an
Divisional Forest Officer v. M. Ramalinga Reddy
Subha B. Nair v. State of Kerala
Mukul Saikia v. State of Assam
J. Ashok Kumar v. State of A.P.
State of Bihar v. Mohd. Kalimuddin
State of U.P. v. Harish Chandra
Sushma Suri v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
State of U.P. v. Ram Swarup Saroj
K. Thulaseedharan v. Kerala State Public Service Commission
MGB Gramin Bank v. Chakrawarti Singh
State of Orissa v. Rajkishore Nanda reported in (2010) 6 SCC 777
Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India
Bihar Public Service Commission v. State of Bihar
Acquittal in a criminal case does not confer a right to appointment if candidature was cancelled and recruitment process concluded.
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.
A candidate's non-involvement in a criminal case, confirmed by removal from the FIR, allows for consideration in the current recruitment process despite prior allegations.
The suppression of a pending criminal case does not automatically disqualify a candidate; the nature of the offence and the candidate's overall character must be considered in recruitment decisions.
Service Law - Post of Constable - Criminal prosecutions faced by him was part of recruitment process - Examination of suitability of candidates for appointment: Role of Criminal Antecedents - process....
Suppression of material information in employment forms can justify cancellation of candidature, and subsequent acquittal may not warrant consideration for selection/appointment, especially in cases ....
Candidates do not have a vested right to insist on the completion of a recruitment process if it is cancelled based on valid reasons, including changes in qualifications and reservation policies.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.