JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J.

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the action of respondent No.2 dated 08.01.2026 (Annexure P-9) wherein the petitioner was not allowed to join on the post of LDC (Common Cadre) in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited on the ground of concealing the factum of pendency of a criminal case against him. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to join on the post of LDC (Common Cadre) in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner had applied for the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in DHBVNL in response to the advertisement dated 05.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) and in the application form (Annexure P-2), the petitioner has mistakenly answered "NO" to the question regarding pending FIRs, though an FIR No.894 dated 25.06.2018 registered under Sections 419 and 420 IPC, at Police Station City Panipat, was pending against him. The petitioner was, thereafter, selected and issued an appointment letter on 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-3) and, in his antecedent form dated 01.06.2021 (Annexure P-4), he correctly disclosed about the pending case, however, the respondents did not permit him to join. The petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing CWP-22199-2021, which was was dismissed on 04.03.2022 (Annexure P-5) owing to the initial concealment. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has been honorably acquitted in the aforesaid criminal case vide judgment dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-6) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat and the State’s appeal against the said judgment of acquittal, was dismissed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Panipat on 10.02.2025 (Annexure P-7). Based on the acquittal, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-8) seeking permission to join the service, however, the impugned order dated 08.01.2026 (Annexure P-9) was passed by the respondent/Nigam rejecting his claim on the ground of initial concealment in the application form.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ravindra Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, 2024(5) SCC 264, whereby it has been held that suppression of a pending criminal case at the application stage is not fatal in every circumstance, particularly when the applicant has been acquitted. Learned counsel for the petitioner emphasizes that the petitioner had corrected the record in the antecedent form (Annexure P- 4) and, in light of his acquittal, the continued refusal to allow him to join the aforementioned post violates his fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 submits that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by raising somewhat similar arguments regarding furnishing correct details in the antecedent form, however, this Court while passing the judgment in CWP-22199-2021, has negated the arguments made by the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 further submits that mere selection pursuant to an advertisement does not confer an absolute right to appointment. It is a trite law that selection in a recruitment process is only one stage and the ultimate suitability of a candidate is to be examined by the employer and therefore, having regard to the concealment made by the petitioner, the respondents were justified in refusing him appointment to the post of LDC.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.

6. Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the petitioner participated in the selection process initiated on 05.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) and adm