JUDGMENT : The prayer in the present petition is to set aside the order dated 14.01.2016 vide which the services of the petitioner were terminated; with a further prayer to reinstate him with effect from 14.01.2016 itself. 2. While praying for setting aside the said order, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said order had been passed without following the principles of natural justice and same could not have been passed without hearing as he had completed two years of his probation and was deemed to have been confirmed. 3. The facts in short are that criminal case was registered against the petitioner for the offence under Section 323, 341, 34 IPC in the year 2010. Another case was registered for the offence under Section 323, 341, 34 IPC in the year 2012. However, in both the cases, the petitioner was acquitted in view of the compromise between the parties. However, the services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 14.01.2016. 4. Reply has been filed. As per the reply, two criminal cases were lodged against the petitioner but he willfully suppressed and concealed the said fact and therefore, his services were terminated in light of condition No.16 of the appointment order. The concealing of the said fact renders his character doubtful. 5. It is not disputed that the petitioner was acquitted in both the cases on account of a compromise. It is also not disputed that the offences are minor in nature. 6. The Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India & ors. (Special Leave Petition [C] No. 20525/2011) decided on 21.07.2016 has specifically held as under :- “(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. (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.” 7. In the similar set of circumstances, the Jaipur Bench of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1603/2011) decided on 27.08.2012 has observed that criminal case arising out of the matrimonial dispute is not a case of moral turpitude and denial of appointment on the ground of pendency of such case should not come in the way of the petitioner. 8. It is evident that the judgments rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh (supra) as well as Jaipur Bench of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar (supra) were not before the authorities at the time when the order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for appointment was passed. 9. In view of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Bhuta Ram Vs. The State of Rajasthan & ors. (D.B. Civil Special Appeal [Writ] No. 442/2016) decided on 08.08.2016 as well as judgments rendered in the case of Avtar Singh (supra) and Ashok Kumar (supra), this Court deems it proper to set aside the order dated 14.01.2016 and remand the matter back to the respondent No.2/appropriate authority who shall consider the matter afresh in the light of the above-mentioned judgments. 10. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.