Appointment Offer Can’t Be Cancelled Merely On Basis Of Previous Involvement In FIR Without Considering Reasoning In Judgment: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has passed a judgment on 11-04-2023 in the case of Mahesh Kumar vs Union Of India W.P.(C) 860/2023. Justice V. Kameshwar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta allowed the petition.
FACTS OF THE CASE
In brief, the petitioner participated in the selection process initiated by the Staff Selection Commission for the post of Sub Inspector in Delhi Police and CAPF (Central Armed Police Force) and Assistant Sub Inspector in CISF vide notification/advertisement circulated in the year 2017. Petitioner was declared as qualified for appearing in the detailed medical examination which was conducted on April 07, 2018. A letter was issued to the petitioner by SSC, thereby calling upon him for verification of documents/certificates on October 09, 2018. Petitioner was finally recommended for appointment as Sub inspector (EXE) in Delhi police in the final results declared by SSC and subject to verification.
A show-cause notice was issued by the office of Commissioner of Police on May 31, 2019 as to why candidature of the petitioner for the post of SI (EXE) Male in Delhi Police 2017 should not be cancelled due to alleged involvement in criminal case i.e. FIR No.424/2011 under Section 498-A/304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act registered at PS: Samthar, as disclosed by him in the Attestation Form.
Vide letter dated September 11, 2020 issued by the office of DCP Recruitment, petitioner was informed that his reply dated June 17, 2019 to the show-cause notice was examined by the Screening Committee but was not found convincing and as such the appointment for the post of SI (EXE) in Delhi Police Exams 2017 is cancelled.
Aggrieved against the issuance of show-cause notice and order dated September 11, 2020 passed by the respondent No.2&3, petitioner preferred O.A.No.525/2021 before the Tribunal for setting aside the show-cause notice dated May 31, 2019 as well as impugned order of the Screening Committee dated September 11, 2020. It was further prayed that the Screening Committee of respondent be directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner and be accordingly appointed as Sub Inspector (EXE) in Delhi Police.
Writ Petition has been preferred by the petitioner challenging an order dated December 08, 2022 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) whereby the Tribunal declined to set aside order dated September 11, 2020 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Recruitment NPL, Delhi canceling the appointment of the petitioner to the post of SI (EXE) in Delhi Police Exam 2017 despite his acquittal in FIR No.424/2011, under Sections 498-A/304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, PS: Samthar, District: Jhansi, UP.
JUDGEMENT
The court had taken reliance from the case of Joginder singh vs union territory of chandigarh 2015 and in the present case the Court had said we are unable to agree with the reasoning of the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the show-cause notice dated May 31, 2019 as well order dated September 11, 2020 passed by the respondents along with the impugned order dated December 08, 2022 is set aside, with the directions to the respondents to consider the appointment of the petitioner for the concerned post, subject to his satisfying all other conditions. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full service law firm that has won a national award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGMENT REVIEWED BY ABHINAV CHATURVEDI