HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 513 / 2018
1. The State of Rajasthan through its Secretary, Department of
Education, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer (Secondary-I), Bhilwara.
4. The Principle, Government Senior Secondary School, Dhosar,
Heera Lal Sharma S/o Sh. Babu Ram Sharma, Aged About 33
Years, Resident of Dhosar, District Bhilwara.
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sunil Joshi on behalf of
Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Civil Misc. Application No.288/2018:
1. For the reasons stated in the application delay in filing the
appeal is condoned.
Special Appeal (Writ) No.513/2018:
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants.
2. Case pleaded before the learned Single Judge by the
respondent was that on compassionate grounds he was appointed
as a Class-IV employee vide order dated 04.08.2016 and pursuant
thereto he joined duties on 19.08.2016. That at the time of
granting appointment no information regarding involvement in a
(2 of 3)
criminal case was sought. Pleading further that after he was
appointed, based on a police verification report dated 23.08.2016
as per which on a complaint lodged by his wife FIR for offences
punishable under Sections 498A and 323 IPC was registered
against him, his services were terminated on 14.10.2016. The
respondent pleaded lack of opportunity of hearing granted to him
before passing the order of termination. He also relied upon a
decision of the Supreme Court pronounced on 21.07.2016 in
Special Leave Petition (C) No.20525/2011, Avtar Singh vs. Union
of India Ors.
3. In the reply to the writ petition the appellants did not plead
any concealment by the writ petitioner. It was not pleaded that
before issuing the appointment order the writ petitioner was called
upon to fill up any form in which information regarding
involvement in a criminal case was sought for and while fill up the
form the respondent hid said fact of he being an accused in the
FIR lodged by his wife.
4. Allowing the writ petition, vide impugned order dated
25.03.2017 the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that
decisions concerning utmost rectitude and impeccable character
and integrity concerning police service would not strictly apply
where appointment is to a Class-IV post. The learned Single
Judge has also rightly highlighted that brush with criminal law
where the offence allegedly committed does not involve an issue
of moral turpitude is relevant. In the instant case the complaint
lodged by the wife pertains to offences punishable under Sections
498A and 323 IPC. It is not the case of the appellant that the
(3 of 3)
respondent has been convicted in said FIR.
5. In Avtar Singh’s case (supra) the Supreme Court itself
observed that cases of trivial nature have to be ignored. The
discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge is therefore
premised on sound legal principles.
6. The writ appeal is dismissed in limine.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)C.J.