Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SALIL KUMAR RAI, SURENDRA SINGH-I, JJ.
Chandrajeet Kumar Gond – Appellant
Versus
High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad And Another – Respondents
Special Appeal No.777 of 2023
Decided on : 25-01-2024
Candidature - Disclosure of Criminal Case - Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and others (2016) 8 SCC 471, State of Madhyra Pradesh and Ors. Vs. Bhupendra Yadav, 2023 (SCC Online) SC 1181, Daya Shankar Yadav Vs. Union of India; 201014 SCC 103, Rajasthan Rajya Vidhut Prasaran Nigam Limited Vs. Anil Kanwaria (2021) 10 SCC 136 - 32, 38.1, 38.2, 38.3, 38.4, 38.5, 38.6, 38.7, 38.8, 38.9, 38.10, 38.11 - The court discussed the guidelines laid down in Avtar Singh case and other relevant cases to determine the disclosure of criminal cases by the candidate and its impact on the appointment or continuation in service. The court found that the appellant deliberately furnished false information about the non-pendency of a criminal case, leading to the cancellation of his candidature.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant applied for a Class-IV post in the District Court, Sultanpur, and qualified for the position. However, he had initially disclosed 'No' to the query regarding any pending criminal case against him, which was found to be false. The District Judge cancelled his candidature after the appellant disclosed the pendency of a criminal case against him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant deliberately furnished false information about the non-pendency of a criminal case, leading to the cancellation of his candidature.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant's deliberate false information about the non-pendency of a criminal case warranted the cancellation of his candidature.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the guidelines laid down in Avtar Singh case and other relevant cases to determine the impact of the disclosure of criminal cases by the candidate on the appointment or continuation in service. The court found that the appellant's deliberate false information warranted the cancellation of his candidature.
Final Decision: The Special Appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the cancellation of the appellant's candidature.
JUDGMENT :
Surendra Singh-I, J.
Heard Sri Shyam Dhar Gupta assisted by Sri Akash Yadav representing the appellant and Sri Ashish Mishra representing the respondents.
2. This special appeal has been instituted against judgment and order dated 18.09.2023 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in WRIT-A No. 15566 of 2023, Chandrajeet Kumar Gond Vs. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Another). Vide impugned order, learned Single Judge had rejected the writ petition filed praying for quashing of the order dated 03.08.2023 passed by learned District Judge, Sultanpur, whereby the candidature of the petitioner for Class-IV post in District Court, Sultanpur, has been rejected.
3. The aforesaid writ petition was filed by the petitioner, Chandrajeet Kumar Gond, with the following prayer to :-
(b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to appoint the petitioner for the post of Orderly/Peon/Office Peon/Farrash (Group ‘D’) within some stipulated period in pursuance of the Advertisement No. 01/Sub.Court/Category D/2022, by which the petitioner may discharge his duty for the said post.
4. The averment made by the appellant/petitioner in the writ petition is that the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad had issued an advertisement bearing Advertisement No. 01/Sub.Court/Category-D/2022 on 30th October, 2022 (30.10.2022) at official website of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The petitioner applied to the post of Orderly/Peon/Office Peon/Farrash: Category-D bearing Advertisement No. 01/Sub.Court/Category-D/2022. The essential qualification for the appointment for the post of Orderly/Peon/Office Peon/Farrash : Category-D was that the candidate must have passed Junior High School (Class-VIIIth). The petitioner had passed Class-VIIIth examination from Nav Bharat Junior High School, Sevapuri, District-Varanasi in the year 2010. The petitioner finding himself eligible for the said post filled the online application form on 13.11.2022. As per him, against the column of “Whether any criminal complaint case have been registered against you ?”, the petitioner inadvertently filled in the reply column as “No”. The selection was held in two rounds of which the first round was held on 17.12.2022 in which the petitioner qualified. The second round of selection was held on 02.04.2023 in which the petitioner again qualified and he was declared as successful. An order was received by the petitioner from the respondents on 20.05.2023 requiring the petitioner to complete various formalities including submission of an affidavit as to whether the petitioner has got any criminal case pending against him or whether he has ever been proceeded against in a criminal case in which he has been acquitted or found guilty. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner claims to have submitted an affidavit on 02.06.2023 in which he has disclosed about pendency of a Case Crime No. 166 of 2020 u/s 307, 323, 504, 506 & 325 I.P.C. registered in Police Station-Mirzamurad, District-Varanasi. Learned District Judge vide impugned order dated 03.08.2023, considering the guidelines issued by the High Court, more particularly paragraph 6 of the guidelines that where a candidates has not disclosed information of criminal case/proceedings then his candidature is liable to be cancelled, has cancelled the candidature of the petitioner.
5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Single Judge without applying proper judicial mind by misreading the
The deliberate furnishing of false information about the non-pendency of a criminal case can warrant the cancellation of candidature or termination of service, as per the guidelines laid down in rele....
Suppression of material facts regarding pending criminal cases has a clear bearing on the character, conduct, and antecedents of the employee, and can lead to termination of services.
Non-disclosure of minor criminal involvement does not automatically disqualify a candidate; suitability must be assessed holistically by the appointing authority.
The concealment of a pending criminal case during the employment application process can justify termination of services, as integrity and character are critical for positions within the judicial sys....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of full disclosure of criminal cases in the Attestation Form and the employer's discretion in considering antecedents for employme....
The cancellation of a candidate's selection based solely on the registration of a criminal case, without evidence of complicity, is unjustified and reflects a lack of proper consideration of the fact....
The court held that the non-disclosure of a past criminal case requires careful evaluation of circumstances, and automatic cancellation of appointment is arbitrary.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
