Termination of a temporary government servant based on certain charges requires compliance with the principles of natural justice, including a notice and an opportunity of hearing. Acquittal in a criminal case deems the individual never involved in the case.

The petitioner was appointed as a Constable in Central Reserve Police Force on 15-2-1999 and thereafter he was sent for training by an order dated 28-9-1999. The services of the petitioner was terminated without assigning any reason under Rule 5 (1) of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1965) read with Rule 15 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1955 ). The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal, which was rejected by an order dated 25-1-2000. Consequently, the petitioner filed the writ petition for quashing of the orders dated 28-9-1999 and 25-1-2000 and for a direction to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and with full back wages and other benefits.

2. Heard Sri M. D. Singh Shekhar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bal Mukund, the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order removing the petitioner was violative of the principles of natural justice and that no reasons was assigned while terminating the services of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that from a perusal of the appellate order, it is clear that the order of termination was based on a report given by the District Magistrate and, therefore, it was not a simpliciter order of termination which could be passed under Rule 5 (1) of the Rules of 1965.

4. In the counter affidavit the respondents have stated that after the enrollment in the police force, the petitioner was required to fill a verification Form No. 25 as contemplated under Rule 14 (b) of the Rules of 1955. The petitioner did not furnish the correct information and concealed the fact that he was charge-sheeted under Sections 147, 148, 352, 323, 504 and 506, I. P. C. The respondents submitted that since the petitioner had concealed material facts with regard to his involvement in a criminal case and

the services of the petitioner being temporary in nature a simpliciter order, was issued under Rule 5 (1) of the Rules of 1965.

5. Before proceeding further it would be appropriate to refer the provisions of the Rules under which the impugned order has been passed. Rule 14 of the Rule of 1955 provides as under:

"14. Verification:

(a) As soon as a man is enrolled, his character, antecedents, connection and age shall be verified in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Central Government from time to time. The verification Roll shall be sent to the District Magistrate or Dy. Commissioner of the Distt. of which the recruit is a resident.

(b) The verification Roll shall be in CRP Form-25 and after verification shall be attached to the Character and Service Roll of the member of the Force concerned.

(c) The Commandant may waive verification in the case of men who have been enrolled in the Force within six months of their discharge from the regular Army. "

6. From the aforesaid it is clear that as soon as the person is enrolled in the force, he is required to submit certain informations in Form No. 25. Clause (l) of Form No. 25 states that:

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

Clause (3) of Form 25 states that-

"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. "

7. Clause 12 of Form No. 25 provides that the person has to give details as to whether he was prosecuted in criminal proceedings or not and whether any criminal case was pending against him. This information was required in order to find out about the antecedents of the candidate. From a perusal of Form No. 25 read with Rule 14 of t