HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 22
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2781 of 2016
Petitioner :- Puneet Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2781 of 2016
Petitioner :- Puneet Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora,J.
Heard Mr. Seemant Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction against the respondents to send him for training on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 19.5.2011 issued by the Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotional Board, Lucknow, for selection of eligible candidates on the post of Sub-Inspector (Civil Police) and Platoon Commander (P.A.C.), the petitioner applied for selection on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police and after due procedure, the petitioner was selected having obtained 334.25 marks under unreserved category on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Heard Mr. Seemant Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction against the respondents to send him for training on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 19.5.2011 issued by the Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotional Board, Lucknow, for selection of eligible candidates on the post of Sub-Inspector (Civil Police) and Platoon Commander (P.A.C.), the petitioner applied for selection on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police and after due procedure, the petitioner was selected having obtained 334.25 marks under unreserved category on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Thereafter, the petitioner was required to appear for medical examination, document verification and submission of an affidavit with regards to the fact as to whether any criminal case is registered or any police investigation is pending against him or not. He submitted that in pursuance to the said directions, the petitioner appeared in the medical examination, wherein he was declared medically fit. Thereafter, he submitted an affidavit to the effect that though a criminal case in pursuance of First Information Report dated 12.11.2011 in Case Crime No. 599 of 2011, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahr, was registered against him but in that criminal case, he was acquitted vide judgment and order dated 6.5.2015 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr. But in utter surprise, the petitioner was not sent for training on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police, though similarly situated persons, namely, Pravindra Kumar, Deep Chand, Om Narayan Mishra and Vipin Kumar have been sent for training on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that though the judgment and order dated 6.5.2015 passed in criminal case attained finality as no appeal has been filed against it but even then, the petitioner has not been sent for training on the post in question. Therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition.
Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions, submitted that no written order with regard to sending the petitioner on training or rejected the candidature of the same has been passed.
I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner was selected on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police pursuant to the advertisement dated 19.5.2011. It appears that the petitioner was not sent for training only on the ground that a criminal case was registered against the petitioner. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was acquitted in the said criminal case vide judgement and order dated 6.5.2015 and no appeal against the said order is pending, therefore, the ground which was taken by the respondents in not sending the petitioner for training, has no substance. Further, at the present moment, no criminal case is pending against the petitioner. Thus, this Court comes to the conclusion that on the facts of the case, the petitioner cannot be restrained from undergoing training for the post of Sub-Inspector, Civil Police.
In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. Opposite parties are directed to send the petitioner on training for the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police forthwith, if he is otherwise eligible, and if there is no adverse against him, which warrants denying his claim for appointment on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Order Date :- 3.3.2016
Ajit/-
Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that though the judgment and order dated 6.5.2015 passed in criminal case attained finality as no appeal has been filed against it but even then, the petitioner has not been sent for training on the post in question. Therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition.
Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions, submitted that no written order with regard to sending the petitioner on training or rejected the candidature of the same has been passed.
I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner was selected on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police pursuant to the advertisement dated 19.5.2011. It appears that the petitioner was not sent for training only on the ground that a criminal case was registered against the petitioner. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was acquitted in the said criminal case vide judgement and order dated 6.5.2015 and no appeal against the said order is pending, therefore, the ground which was taken by the respondents in not sending the petitioner for training, has no substance. Further, at the present moment, no criminal case is pending against the petitioner. Thus, this Court comes to the conclusion that on the facts of the case, the petitioner cannot be restrained from undergoing training for the post of Sub-Inspector, Civil Police.
In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. Opposite parties are directed to send the petitioner on training for the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police forthwith, if he is otherwise eligible, and if there is no adverse against him, which warrants denying his claim for appointment on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police.
Order Date :- 3.3.2016
Ajit/-
