Rachhpal Singh vs State of Punjab and Others

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

CM No. 11329 of 2013:

Application is allowed as prayed for. Annexure P-3 is taken on record. CM disposed of.

Main case:

The instant writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus for directing the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner as Constable in the district police cadre of Punjab Police pertaining to district Ludhiana.

As per pleadings on record, an advertisement was issued in December, 2010 for recruitment of 5778 posts of male/female Constables in the State of Punjab. For Ludhiana district, 95 posts were advertised for Ludhiana (Rural) and 496 posts for Ludhiana (CP). The last date for submission of applications was stipulated as 28.12.2010.

It has been submitted that the petitioner who belongs to the reserved category of scheduled castes submitted his application for recruitment as Constable in the district police cadre (Ludhiana district). It has further been contended that the petitioner was eligible and possessed the requisite qualifications for the post in terms of the advertisement issued in December, 2010. It is further averred that the petitioner was duly selected but in spite thereof, was not issued the offer of appointment. Accordingly, the petitioner sought information under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and vide communication dated 17.05.2013, the petitioner was informed that the matter had been reported by the SSP Ferozepur and DSP, Vigilance Department, Ferozepur that case bearing FIR No. 125 dated 25.07.2009 under Sections 324, 323, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code stand registered against the petitioner at Police Station Jalalabad, district Ferozepur and a criminal prosecution ensuing therefrom is pending in the Court. Ostensibly, it is on such basis that the petitioner has been denied appointment.

Counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that none of the offence alleged against the petitioner involves moral turpitude and as such, there would be no bar under the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 to decline the offer of appointment to the petitioner in spite of having been selected.

Having heard counsel for the petitioner at length and having perused the pleadings on record, I am of the considered view that the present writ petition merits dismissal.

Even though, mere registration of FIR does not lend the colour of conviction yet it would require notice that in the application form that the petitioner had submitted in response to the advertisement issued in December, 2010 for recruitment as male Constable, there was a specific column whereby candidates were required to give information regarding involvement in any criminal case. Counsel for the petitioner has fairly conceded that the petitioner had left such column blank in spite of the registration of FIR against him prior to the date of submission of the application form. The petitioner, as such is clearly guilty of material concealment of facts. Such conduct on the part of a candidate, who is seeking appointment to a post by concealing relevant material facts cannot but be deprecated. No interference in the matter is called for. The writ petition accordingly is dismissed.