IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 08.05.2025 Kuldip Singh ......Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: Mr. Robin Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent to issue him belt number as well as appointment letter.

2. The petitioner, pursuant to Advertisement No. 4/2020 dated 30.12.2020, applied for the post of Constable under BCA category. He successfully cleared all the tests. The respondent conducted verification of his credentials and found that he was facing criminal proceedings at the time of filing application, thus, he was not eligible to participate in the selection process. The respondent did not issue him appointment letter.

3. Mr. Robin Dutt, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has duly disclosed factum of pending FIR in his application form. The respondent till the conclusion of selection process did not object to his candidature and refused to issue appointment letter on the ground of pending FIR No.317 dated 16.09.2019 under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Civil Lines, Sirsa. The act of respondent amounts to misuse of process of law and violation of principle of estoppel.

4. During the course of hearing, Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana produced copy of application form. There is no column in the application form from which it can be culled out that petitioner disclosed factum of pending FIR in the application form. Actually, as per electronic system, if a candidate opts for ‘Y’, the window further opens for next column otherwise there is no column with respect to FIR. Rule 12.16(4)(a) of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (in short ‘PPR’) (as made applicable to the State of Haryana) provides that a candidate would not be eligible if FIR is pending against him and charges stand framed. Learned state counsel pointing out judgment of conviction submits that charges were framed against the petitioner on 11.02.2020 whereas advertisement itself was issued in December’ 2020. The petitioner was acquitted in 2024, thus, he was not eligible to participate in the selection process.

5. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.

6. Rule 12.16 of PPR prescribes procedure for direct recruitment. Sub- Rule (4) provides that if an FIR is lodged or is pending against a candidate he shall not be treated eligible for application, if charges are framed against him. Rule

12.16 (4) of PPR reads as: -

“Rule 12.16 Procedure for direct recruitment:-

(1) XXXX XXXX XXXX (2) XXXX XXXX XXXX (3) XXXX XXXX XXXX (4) Applications:-

(a) If an F.I.R. is lodged/is pending against a candidate, he shall not be treated eligible for application, if charges are framed against him.

(b) Applications with prescribed fee shall be received online. The information submitted online by the candidates shall be final.

(c) Roll number shall be allotted to the eligible candidates and put on the official website of the Haryana Staff Selection Commission. Once the roll numbers are allotted, the candidate shall be able to generate to join the process of selection.”

7. Rule 12.18 of PPR provides that candidate shall disclose the fact regarding registration of FIR or criminal complaint against him for any offence under any law along with the current status of such case in the application form and verification-cum-attestation form. Non-disclosure of such information shall lead to disqualification of the candidate outrightly solely on this ground. Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 12.18 provides for the manner of dealing with a situation arising from verification of character and antecedents. For the ready reference, Rule 12.18 is reproduced as below:-

“12.18. Verification of character and antecedents:-

(1) The appointing authorit