Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1185 (RAJ)

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

2012-05-09

M.N.BHANDARI

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is heard finally. 2. The petitioner is one who was selected for the post of Senior Teacher (English) however he was denied joining on the post due to pendency of the criminal case. A report in this regard was given by the Superintendent of Police. 3. It is submitted that pendency of criminal case cannot be a bar to allow joining of post more so when appointment is given. Condition No. 3 of the appointment order was contrary to the rule 12 of the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 (for short 'the Rules of 1971'). The respondents may accordingly be directed to allow petitioner to join the post in question. This is more so when petitioner is not connected to the criminal case as he has been added as an accused for offence by section 120-B IPC. 4. Learned counsel for respondents, on the other hand, submits that order or appointment was issued on certain conditions. Referring to condition No. 3 it is indicated that joining was subject to verification of antecedents of the petitioner by the SP concerned. The SP concerned indicated pendency of criminal case against the petitioner hence he was not allowed to join the post. In the aforesaid background, there is no illegality in the act of the respondents. 5. I have considered rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Petitioner was allowed to appear in the selection and given appointment vide order dated 7.10.2011 on the post of Senior Teacher. He was not allowed to join duties due to adverse verification report of the SP. The condition No. 3 of the appointment order has been invoked by the respondents for the aforesaid purpose. I find that rule 12 of the Rules of 1971 is relevant thus quoted hereunder - "12. Character- The character of a candidate for direct recruitment to the Service, must be such as will qualify him for employment in the Service. He must produce a certificate of good character from the Principal, academic officer of the University or College or School in which he was last educated and two such certificates written not more than six months prior to the date of application, from two responsible persons not connected with his College or University or School and not related to him. He must produce a certificate of good character from the Principal, academic officer of the University or College or School in which he was last educated and two such certificates written not more than six months prior to the date of application, from two responsible persons not connected with his College or University or School and not related to him. Note - (1) A conviction by a Court of Law need not in itself involve the refusal of a certificate of good character. The circumstances of the conviction should be taken into account and if they involve no moral turpitude or association with crimes of violence or with movement which has its object the overthrow by violent means of the Government as by law established, the mere conviction need not be regarded as disqualification. (2) Ex-prisoner who by their disciplined life while in prison and by their subsequent good conduct, have proved to be completely reformed should not be discriminated against, on grounds of their previous conviction for purposes of employment in the Service. Those who are convicted of completely reformed on the production of a report to that effect from the Superintendent, After-Care-Home or if there are no such Home in a particular district, from the Superintendent of police of that district. (3) Those convicted of offences involving moral turpitude shall be required to produce a certificate from the Superintendent, After -Care-Home, endorsed by the Inspector General of prisons, to the effect that they are suitable for employment as they have proved to have been completely reformed by their disciplined life while in prison and by their subsequent good conduct in an After-Care-Home." 7. Perusal of the above quoted rule reveals that one is not ineligible to get character certificate even if convicted. Here the person is only facing criminal trial which is not yet concluded. Mere pendency of criminal case is not a bar to allow joining after appointment. Pendency of criminal case cannot be said to be adverse for joining of the post. The view aforesaid is supported by the following judgments - 1. Surendra Pal v. State of Rajasthan & ors. SB Civil Writ Petition No. 2896/2011 decided on 3.1.2012 by this court at Jaipur Bench 2. Ashu Kumar v. State of Rajasthan & ors. SB Civil Writ Petition No. 5034/2008 decided on 27.9.2008 at Principal Seat, Jodhpur 8. The view aforesaid is supported by the following judgments - 1. Surendra Pal v. State of Rajasthan & ors. SB Civil Writ Petition No. 2896/2011 decided on 3.1.2012 by this court at Jaipur Bench 2. Ashu Kumar v. State of Rajasthan & ors. SB Civil Writ Petition No. 5034/2008 decided on 27.9.2008 at Principal Seat, Jodhpur 8. In the light of the aforesaid, writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to allow joining of the petitioner on the post of Sr Teacher (English). Petitioner would be entitled to seniority from the date of appointment. Respondents would however be at liberty to take action if the outcome of the criminal case comes adverse to the petitioner. This disposes of the stay application also.Writ petition allowed. *******