By the Court.—This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 2.3.2006, passed by His Lordship Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dilip Gupta, sitting singly, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39526 of 1998 (Surendra Singh Yadav v. Union of India and another).

2. The judgment aforesaid is assailed on the ground that there is no statutory format prescribed for submitting an application for appointment to the post of Constable (Recruit). It is also stated that the petitioner-appellant had actually been acquitted in Criminal Case No. 458 of 1997, under Sections 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. P.S. Saidpur, District Ghazipur, hence any omission in furnishing his antecedents in the verification roll in the application form could not have been a ground for dismissing the appellant from service. It is also stated that the learned Single Judge has failed to notice in the writ petition the judgment dated 24.9.1999, passed by His Lordship Hon’ble Mr. Justice O.P. Garg in C.M.W.P. No. 4591 of 1999 in re: Anuj Kumar v. D.I.G. Karmik, PHQ and others and the judgment dated 28.1.2004, passed by His Lordship Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bhanwar Singh in C.M.W.P. No. 3045 (S/S) of 2003 in re: Udai Vir Singh v. Union of India and others. Copies of these judgments have been appended alongwith this special appeal.

3. It is lastly submitted that the impugned judgment has the effect on fundamental rights of the petitioner-appellant. The impugned judgment and order could not have been passed without issuing any show cause notice and affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner-appellant. Principles of natural justice has not been followed while passing the impugned judgment and order. The termination order of the petitioner-appellant was liable to be quashed by the learned Single Judge.

4. We have heard Shri A.P. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant and Ms. Rashmi Tripahi, learned counsel appearing for Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi (respondent No. 1) at length and have perused the record.

5. It appears while submitting the application form for the post of Constable (Recruit), a candidate has to fill in a verification roll as required under Rule 12 (b) of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the CRPF Rules). This verification roll was also appended as Annexure No. C.A.1 to the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition. The verification signed by the petitioner-appellant reads thus :

“WARNING :

The furnishing of false information or suppression of any factual information in the Verification Roll will be a disqualification and is likely to render candidate unfit for employment under the Government.

If detained, convicted, debarred etc., subsequent to the completion and submission of this form, the information should be communicated immediately to the Union Public Service Commission or the authority to which the Verification Roll has been sent earlier, as the case may be, failing which it will be deemed to be suppression of factual information.

If the fact that false information has been furnished or that there has been suppression of any factual information in the Verification Roll comes to notice at any time during the service of a person, his services would be liable to be terminated.

....................................

12(a) Have you ever been arrested, prosecuted, kept under detention or bound down/fined, convicted, by a Court of law for any offence or debarred/disqualified by any Public Service Commission from appearing at its examination/selection, or debarred from taking any examination/rusticated by any University or any other education authority/Institution?

(b) Is any case pending against you in any Court of law, University or any other education authority/institution at the time of filling up this Verification Roll?

If answer to (a) or (b) is ‘’Yes’ then give details of prosecution, detention, fine, conviction and punishment etc. and state about the case pendi