JUDGMENT : Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. Petitioner has again come to this Court as observations made by this Court in its earlier order dated 30/01/2008 in SB Civil Writ Petition No.761/2008 were not accepted and considered by the authorities who had been asked to examine the representation and re-consider case of the petitioner. It was observed earlier by this Court that non-mentioning of the fact regarding criminal case was a technical mistake. However, the authorities on the representation made by the petitioner upheld their earlier order of removal dated 25/10/2007, vide order dated 19/08/2008. Both the orders dated 25/10/2007 and 19/08/2008 have been impugned by the petitioner. 2. The main thrust of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the offence for which the petitioner has been implicated in the criminal case were under Section 147, 341, 323, 504 IPC for which FIR was registered in 2000, a compromise had been arrived at at the Panchayat level in the case on 01/06/2004 and mistakenly in the verification form of 7th August, 2004, the petitioner did not mention about the said case. The compromise had been accepted by the Court on 01/11/2004. It is also submitted that the concealment, if any, cannot be said to be a material concealment which would have affected his service in the CRPF as it was relating to petty offence. Moreso, when the matter had already been compromised, the authorities ought to have looked into the matter. Even otherwise, this Court too had earlier made an observation while allowing the petitioner to withdraw his writ petition and make representation to the authorities. In view of above, the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 25/10/2007 by which the petitioner has been struck off from the strength of 154 Battalion of CRPF and his medals and documents have been forfeited deserves to be set aside. The appellate order dated 19/08/2008also deserves to be set aside on same count. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, opposed the same and supported the order passed by both the authorities. 4. The issue relating to concealment is no more res-integra. The Supreme Court in the case of Avtar Singh v. Union of India (UOI) and ors.: (2016) 8 SCC 471 , held as under:- "30. We have noticed various decisions and tried to explain and reconcile them as far as possible. 4. The issue relating to concealment is no more res-integra. The Supreme Court in the case of Avtar Singh v. Union of India (UOI) and ors.: (2016) 8 SCC 471 , held as under:- "30. We have noticed various decisions and tried to explain and reconcile them as far as possible. In view of aforesaid discussion, we summarize our conclusion thus: (1) Information given to the employer by a candidate as to conviction, acquittal or arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information. (2) While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information. (3) The employer shall take into consideration the Government orders/instructions/rules, applicable to the employee, at the time of taking the decision. (4) In case there is suppression or false information of involvement in a criminal case where conviction or acquittal had already been recorded before filling of the application/verification form and such fact later comes to knowledge of employer, any of the following recourse appropriate to the case may be adopted : - (a) In a case trivial in nature in which conviction had been recorded, such as shouting slogans at young age or for a petty offence which if disclosed would not have rendered an incumbent unfit for post in question, the employer may, in its discretion, ignore such suppression of fact or false information by condoning the lapse. (b) Where conviction has been recorded in case which is not trivial in nature, employer may cancel candidature or terminate services of the employee. (c) If acquittal had already been recorded in a case involving moral turpitude or offence of heinous/serious nature, on technical ground and it is not a case of clean acquittal, or benefit of reasonable doubt has been given, the employer may consider all relevant facts available as to antecedents, and may take appropriate decision as to the continuance of the employee. (5) In a case where the employee has made declaration truthfully of a concluded criminal case, the employer still has the right to consider antecedents, and cannot be compelled to appoint the candidate. (5) In a case where the employee has made declaration truthfully of a concluded criminal case, the employer still has the right to consider antecedents, and cannot be compelled to appoint the candidate. (6) In case when fact has been truthfully declared in character verification form regarding pendency of a criminal case of trivial nature, employer, in facts and circumstances of the case, in its discretion may appoint the candidate subject to decision of such case. (7) In a case of deliberate suppression of fact with respect to multiple pending cases such false information by itself will assume significance and an employer may pass appropriate order cancelling candidature or terminating services as appointment of a person against whom multiple criminal cases were pending may not be proper. (8) If criminal case was pending but not known to the candidate at the time of filling the form, still it may have adverse impact and the appointing authority would take decision after considering the seriousness of the crime. (9) In case the employee is confirmed in service, holding Departmental enquiry would be necessary before passing order of termination/removal or dismissal on the ground of suppression or submitting false information in verification form. (10) For determining suppression or false information attestation/verification form has to be specific, not vague. Only such information which was required to be specifically mentioned has to be disclosed. If information not asked for but is relevant comes to knowledge of the employer the same can be considered in an objective manner while addressing the question of fitness. However, in such cases action cannot be taken on basis of suppression or submitting false information as to a fact which was not even asked for. (11) Before a person is held guilty of suppressio veri or suggestio falsi, knowledge of the fact must be attributable to him." 5. In view of the observations made in Para 30(4) of Avtar Singh v. Union of India (UOI) and ors. (supra) and taking into consideration that the office, for which the petitioner had been implicated in the criminal case, were of petty nature and compoundable and also keeping in view the observations made by this Court earlier, the authorities cannot be said to have applied their mind while passing order dated 25/10/2007 and and appellate order dated 19/08/2008. (supra) and taking into consideration that the office, for which the petitioner had been implicated in the criminal case, were of petty nature and compoundable and also keeping in view the observations made by this Court earlier, the authorities cannot be said to have applied their mind while passing order dated 25/10/2007 and and appellate order dated 19/08/2008. The punishment of removal from service and withholding of medals and service benefits, cannot be sustained in view of law as stated supra. 6. Consequently, the writ petition stands allowed. The orders impugned dated 25/10/2007 and 19/08/2008 are quashed & set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with continuity of service, seniority and other service benefits including increments etc.. However, the pay and allowances of the petitioner for the intervening period from 2007 till reinstatement shall be computed notionally and the other service benefits be given actually. The compliance of the order shall be made within a period of two months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order. No costs.