The High Court · 2025

Order

This writ petition is filed with the fol.lou.;-r* prayer: "... action of the 3.t respondent in issuing the proceedings No.3Z03S/ CISF/ KRTCM) B. prashi/ 15/ 1911 dated 23.O2.2015, terminating the petitioner from seruice, which was confinned bA the 4x, respond.ent tn his proceedings No.37035/ CISF/ KR.I.C(M) Prashi/ Ciminal Case/2015/426O d.ated 21.07.2015 as illegal, improper, unjust, contran) to la ut a.nrl further direct the respondents to reinstate th.e petitton.er in sentice as constable and pass such order or orders as thi.s Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstance s of the case."

2. Heard Mr. B. Ashok, learned counsel representing Mr. B. Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, arrd Mr. G.R.S. Akhileswar, learned counsel representing Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor Genera_l of India for respondents.

3. Brief facts: Petitioner was provisionally selected as Constable in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) through Special Recruitment Drive held in Left Wing Extremists (LWE) alfected Districts for the year 2OI2-2O13. petitioner was 1 JAK, J W.P.No.2296? oi20l6 instructed br Senior Commaldant, CISF Unit, Chennai Port Trust, uide letter dated 17.05.2014, to visit CISF Kharvel Recrrrit Training Centre, Mundali, on 12^O7.2014 for undergoins basic training scheduled to commence from

14.07 .2014 . Petitioner arrived at the training centre on

12.O7 .2014. submitted Character and Antecedents Certificate, dalt:d 27.06.2014, issued by Station House Officer, Thir'-rrnzrla,\.apalem, Khammam District. Petitioner was named Ln Llrimc No. I93 of 201 I registered for offence under Sectior't ?,'24 r lw 34 of Indian Pena-l Code. Said case ended in acquitti'rl on 19.06.2014.

4. While rrndergoing training, a Mid-Term Break for two weeks q,as 11rar-rted for the trainees from 14.12.2O14 to

28.12.2014. Petrtroner availed the break and did not return to the Training Ccntre by 28.12,2014 for further training. Petitioner overstaved from 29.12.2014. Two call-up letters were issued to petitioner by the competent authority. In spite of the etters, petitioner did not attend the training. After due consideration, CISF Standing Screening Committee recommended that petitioner was not suitable , - JAlt J W.P.No.22967 of 2016 for appointment in view of deliberate suppression of material facts and the same was conveyed to petitioner uzde letter dated 2l.OT.2OlS. The Chief Commandant of Mundali, uide proceedings dated 23.O2.2O15 passgfl orders of termination. This order dated 23/24.02.2015 with order dated 27 .Ol .20 15 are under challenge in this writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was appointed as Constable in a selection process conducted by CISF. That he passed physical test, written test, appeared for medical test and after medical test, petitioner was asked to attend the training, instructed to report on 72.O7.2O 14. It is further submitted that petitioner proceeded to his native place on 14. L2.2OI4 during Mid-Term Break. It is aiso submitted that during Mid-Term Break (Leave), order dated 23/24.02.2015 was served on him terminating his appointment on the ground of invoivement in a criminal case before joining in CISF. 6 It is submitted that petitioner was falsely implicated in Crime No.l93 of 2Ol1 registered for offence under Section 324 r/w 34 IpC and the same ended in acquittal by r- =**'..*JsfiI '.-... I I I I I I 4 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of 2016 the Court of .Judicial Magistrate of First C1ass, Special Mobile Court, Khammarn, in C.C.No.396 of 2OLl uide judgment dated 19.06.2014.It is further submitted that for a small dispute, de facto complainant bore grudge on petitioner and filed a false complaint resulting in a case. That having been acquitted in the criminal case, petitioner cannot be terminated, without providing an opportunity of hearing.

7. It is submitted that as per Policy Guidelines, for considering th e cases of candidates for appointment in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) and Assam Rifles, pendency ol' criminal cases against candidates is to be considered in the light of the Guidelines issued by Ministry of Home Aftairs, dated 01.02.2012. On the basis of Guidelines, it is submitted that if a candidate does not disclose his/l-rer involvement andlor arrest in criminal case(s), complaint cases(s), preventive proceedings under IPC or any other Act of the Central or State Government in the application form, during medical examination as well as in the attestation/verification form which comes to the I G 5 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of20l6 notice of recruiting authorities, the caadidature would not be cancelled on that ground alone. That his appointment was cancelled without following the principles of natural justice. That the termination order passed. against him has to be set aside, granting an opportunity to petitioner to explain his case in the light of the Guidelines issued.

8. Learned counsel appearing for respondents submitted that petitioner after being selected was directed to appear for training w.e.f. l4.OZ.2Ol4 and reported for training at Mundali on 12.02.2014, was permitted to undergo training. It is further submitted that petitioner before undergoing training submitted a Character and Antecedent Certificate issued by Station House Officer, Thirumalayapalem Police Station, Khammam District, dated 27.06.2014 stating that there was no pending case against petitioner. On the basis of the certificate, petitioner was permitted for training from 14.02.2014 to 14.12.2014. It is submitted that a break of two weeks was given from

14.12.2014 to 28.72.2014, but petitioner did not report to training on 28.12.2014 and absented unauthorizedlv for I- I 6 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of20l6 the traininq prograrnme. It is submitted that two call-up letters dated 27.01.2015 and 13.O2.2OI5 were addressed by the compctent authority to petitioner to report for training, btrt. petitioner did not report

9. It is srrbmitted that petitioner herd not only overstayed, but never reported for training, in spite of call- up letters. [t is further subrnitted that the contention of petitioner rhat he was not served aly notice nor was granted arly opportunity of hearing prior to termination orders is nol correct. It is a-lso submitted that petitioner in his attestat ion form, signed on 17.06.2014, stating that there were no pending cases against him, suppressing the fact of criminal case registered agajnst him for an offence under Section 324 r /w 34 IPC.

10. lt is contended that even if the case ended in acquittal, tlrc fr:ct that petitioner did not mention about the criminal ca sc registered against him woulcl amount to suppression ol material fact and cal be heid against petitioner fcr suppression. It is submitted that on noticing the pendencv ol criminal case suppressed by petitioner, the i.i 7 JAK, ., W.P.No.22967 of20l6 1 1th Standing Screening Committee held petitioner to be unsuitable for appointment afld terminated him. That there 15 nO infirmity in the orders dated 23/24.02.2015 and 2t.07.2015.

11. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered the rival submissions.

12. Petitioner was selected for the post of Constable in CISF, after physical, written and medical tests. Petitioner reported to training on 12.07.2014 at Cuttack. Training was from 14.07.2OI4 to 14.12.2014. As per training schedule, a break of two weeks was given to a.ll the trainees, petitioner left training unit on 14.12.2014 and rvas to report again on 29.72.2014. It is observed from the counter affidavit that two call-up letters dated 27.Ol.2)ls and 13.02.2015 were addressed to petitioner by the competent authorilr to report for training. In spite of the two cali-up letters, petitioner did not report for training, he overstayed the period of Mid-Term Break and never reported back to training. This fact is not disputed, nor any reply is liled rebutting the statements. I 8 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of 2016

13. Petitioner submitted Character and Antecedents Certificate i Mee Seva Certificate bearing No.OOZZ 12539 l99l obtained liom the Sub-Inspector of Police, Thirumalal apalem Police Station, Khammzrm District, dated 28.06 2014 (Ex.P4, page No.19), which reads as follorvs: "Certi.lled that the character and antecedents in respect of Sri METTU RAVINDAR, son of Sh'i Babu, resident of Hndt1,rutltt, Post Pindiprolu, Di,stict Khammam, Police Station Thirumalayapalem, State of Telangana, hns been uerified bg me and found no pendtng cases agaist, he inuolued in cime No. 193/ 1 1 , U/ Sec 324 R/ e 34 IP(:. TLrc case is acquttted u/ sec 248(1) Cr.P.C. on 19-06 2()1,1 is recorded in Police Station. Thus than thctt, there is no objectton to his appointment in the. Central Indu st ne I Secuity Force. "

14. Anneure R-1 is the Offer of Appointment of petitioner, Annexure R-2 is the Character ard Antecedents Certilicate r:I Station House Officer, Thirumalayapalem (annexed r,r,ith counter affidavit). In Annexure R 2, it is mentioned lrv the Station House Officer that petitioner was involved in Crime No. 193 of 2Ol1 registered for offence under Section 324 r/w 34 IPC and was acquitted on

19.06.2OI4. At page No.38 of the counter affidavit, Certificate of Character dated 28.06.2014 issued by the a.O 9 JAIq J w.P.No.22967 of20l6 Revenue Divisional Oflicer, Khammam, is placed on record, certifying that petitioner bears reputation, character ald has no antecedents which render him unsuitable for Government employment. Annexure R-3 .is the Attestation Form submitted by petitioner. Clause 12 of the Attestation Form has sub-clauses from (a) to (l). On a perusal of Clause 72 and its sub-clauses, it is noticed that petitioner stated in all the columns in bold letters as 1,1O,. The Attestation Form is filled and signed on 77.06.2014 and sub-clause fi) of Clause 12 is as follows: "12[i) Is any case pending against you in any University or any other Educational Authority/ Institution at the time of filling up this Attestation Form?"

15. Against this column, it is written as .NO,,. On comparison of Annexure R-2 with column 12 of ttre Attestation Form, it is observed that petitioner was acquitted in Crime No. 193 of 2OlI on ),9.06.2014, but whereas the Attestation Form is dated 17.06.2014. This indicates that as on the date of filling up of the Attestation Form, Crime No.193 of 2OlI was pending against petitioner ald this information was not disclosed in the l0 JA]q J w.P.No.22967 of 2016 Attestation Form, signed/attested and filled on 17.06.2014 by petitioner'. Fact remains that petitioner was involved in a criminal c:rse in Crime No.193 of 20 I l.

16. On a perusal of the Guidelines issued by Ministry of Home Alfarrs, relied upon by petitioner, it is evident that an opportunity should be granted to petitioner, in case if petitioner's c:u-rdidature has already been consiclered and was appoir-rted and that while cancelling/terminating the appointment, principles of natural justice shall be followed and an opportunity should be accorded to the candidate. It is observecl from Guideline il issued by Ministry of Home Affarrs, datt:d 01.02.2012, that involvement of candidate and non disclosure of involvement and/or in criminal case(s), cornplaint case(s), preventive proceedings etc., under IPC or any other Act of the Central or State Government in the application form, dr-rring medica-l examinatio n as weli as the attestation/ verification form, the samc will not be a ground for cancellation of appointment. 0 JAK, J W.l'.No-22967 ot 2016 L7. It is not in dispute that petitioner was selected and has undergone trajning from l4.OZ.2Ol4 and was permitted to avail Mid-Term Break w.e.f. 14.12.2014 to 28.12.2014. It is a fact, not rebutted that petitioner has not reported for remaining part of the training programme. Petitioner was to report to duty at the training centre on 29.12.2OL4. It is averred in the counter affidavit that petitioner was addressed two letters on 22.01.2015 and

13.02.2015 by the competent authority directing to report to training. The contents of letter dated 22.OI.2O15 are as follows: "... You have permitted to avail two weeks mid-term breaks w.e.f. 14.12.2014 to 2g.12.2014. After completion of said pcriod, you werc supposed to join on 28.12.2Ot4 (FN) for further training but you failed to do so and remained OSL w.e f. 29.12.2O14 without permission of Competent Authority.. 2. Hence, you are hereby directed to report to this RTC immediately for training. If you failed to report back to this RTC within a week on receipt of this notice, appropriate disciplinary action would be initiated against you in accoidance with provisions of CISF Rules, 2OO 1 .,,

18. The contents of letter dated 13.O2.201s are as follows: 1 t2 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 0f2016 { ". . . You have permitted to avail two weeks mid-term breaks w.e.f. 14.12.2014 to 28.12.2014. After completion of said period, you were supposed to join on 2A.12.2014 (AN) for further training but you ftrileci to do so and remained OSL u'.e.f. 29.12.2O14 without pe rmission of Compe tent Authoritlt. '.).. Hence, you are hereby directed to report to tl-ris RTC immediately for training. If you failed to report back to this RTC within a week on receipt ol' this notice, appropriate disciplinary action '"vould be initiated against you in accordance with provisions of CISF Ruies, 2001."

19. The contents of termination orders, dated 23 124.O2.2() 15, are as follor.r's: "ORDER ln pursuance of Provision to sub-rule (2) oI Ruie 25 of Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2OOl, thc service of Roll No. 1230055/CISF No.1405067O1 Const/UT Mettu Ravinder, S/o. Shri Mettu Babu is hereby terminated from CISF w.e.f. 23.O2.2.015 as he is not suitable for appointment in CISF as per the decision issued by FHQ New Delhi vide letter No.E-32017(1),12112014-Rectt-7 1446 dated t8.02.2O15, as he was involved in criminal case bt'fore joining CISF. Hcnce, CISF No. 140506701 Const/UT Mettu Ravinder, S/o. Shri Mettu Babu will be no more in the services of CISF."

20. The order dated2l.O7.2015 is as follows: " 3tTqb eRr q.Ed enlec qd frqi6' os.oo.zots &' tiE{tt

02. {{r skt4r i 3flqoi q6 3ttI,'tiT 6{qT qIil ? fu efiqb AtI !-<d .}fi4-C{ gi Judgement order (C.C.No.396 of 2o11) &cirgs qRTSrur cug EEqrd'q tflrdrd E] tqrIIqT qTl I3 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of20l6

03. sq<tm ew-{r C u56n* *q{ur o{rs {gqrdq - i-{ttEl( t r* qe offild ord..rqr + fu' ;;""tu Ravindar F s'q 6t r r fr €Eq o-t0 fr rsr.rqr qr o{tr r{rqb flqfoq t_au d qfu* q-qnT q-* eir q-fl0fl-6-iurq7 0qr rr.,r qr Bq-+l €Eq {+tHq 6A-A ERj rT--{dr t *fraqi fuqT.1q1 .ir q1qj rEiI fu rvrettu Ravindar si 6tJ ERt q0 fu-ql qr a-oi *r dfu-+ s-d E-fiq EF r{qi uqd qrTrrn6-*qq fr A d ,1r*; d'ufr +t eqr-qr ?r q qq-+ r{qtrf}+. wfts a'd-q # v'T^S{-64 fuqlfi rrfl Esn ?r qeftq r i ,fr eeq wtmq 6+dl fi ilfl Unsuilabtc fu-qr rrqr I 4.. {s s.E.q fr qs ttdiTrqr qqr t fu fur 6t{ eErT e1frrr 6-i-A d snur{ Tfl e fu .flc.6 }q q{ g+ fr"rt fuqrurE+t"

21. It is observed from both these orders, that nothing is reflected as to r,r,hether petitioner was intimated with regard to his termination or his invoivement in a criminal case. Guidelines, dated 01.02.2012, a::e framed by Ministry of Home Affairs in consultation with CApF. The relevant Guidelines are as follows: "1. A candidate is required to declare in the application form, whethcr he has been arrested, prosecuted or convictcd by a court for any criminal. offence. If a candidate does not disclos"e the fact of his/her involvement and/or arrest in criminal case(s), complaint caselsj, preventive proceedings etc. under IpC or any other Act of the Central or State Government in the application form, during medical examination ." *.it ," i., the attestation/verihcation form and the faci subsequently comes to the notice of recruiting authorities is found out from the verificatioi report received from the District authorities or otherwise, his cardidature/appointment will be cancelled. However, in case the candidate has .r. I I I I I I I4 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of 2016 already been appointed, while cancelling/ terminating the appointment, the princrple of natural justice shall be followed and opportunity of being heard would be accorded to the candidate. II. Ii a candidatc does not disclose his/her involvemcnt and/or arrest in criminal case(s), complaint case(s), preventive proceedings etc. under IPC or any other Act of the Central or State Governmt-'nt in the application form discloses the same during medical examination / PET as weil as in the attestation/ verification form, in writing the candidature will not be calcelled on this ground alone.

22. On a perusal of the Guidelines, it can be inferred that if any of the candidate required to declare in his application form of his being arrested/prosecuted or convicted in any criminal offence and if he does not disclose the fact and if it is not verified and if after verification, it is found that he is involved in criminal offence, his candidature would be ca-ncelled. It is also stated in Guideline I that, in case, if a candidate was already appointed, while cancelling or terminating the appointment, principles of natural justice have to be followed.

23. Be that as it may, fact that petitioner suppressed his involvement in crimina-l case is evident from the report. But, Guidelines issued by the N{inistry of Home Affairs

1.5 JAK, J W.P.No.22967 of20l6 have to be followed, Guidelines I and II contemplate that principles of natural justice are to be adhered to. Suppression of fact of involvement in criminal case in an Attestation Form has also been dealt with' in Guidelines I and II. Guidelines are issued after consultation with CAPF and the Ministry of Home Affairs Police-ll Division, the respondent authorities are bound to follow the Guidelines and an opportunity is to be provided to the petitioner. An explanation from petitioner as to why he did not declare about the involvement in criminal case in his Application Form (when he was required to declare the same) has to be at least sought for before terminating which is not forthcoming.

24. Not adhering to the provisions of Guidelines I and II issued on O1.02.2012, render the orders dated 23/24.O2.2O15 and 27.07.2OI5 bad in 1aw and are liable to be set aside and are accordingly set aside. Needless to state that respondent authorities shall after issuing notice to petitioner and after receiving the explanation shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period 1 t6 JAK, J W.I'.No.22967 of 2016 (! of four (O4f months from the date of receipt of a r:opy of this order.

25. For reasons aforesaid, writ petition is alloivecl. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above. witness THE HoN'BLE THE AcflNG cH|EF JUSTTCE suJoy pAUL, on this MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE //TRUE COPY// SD/-P. PONNA KRISHNA ASS\STANT REGISTRAR i1 \\. \ - \ ' ' f ' ,secrroru oFFtcER ' The Secretary, (lVlrnistry of Home Affairs), Union of lnfia, Government of lndia, North Block New Delhi The Assistant Commandant, CISF Training Centre, KRTC, Mundali, Cuttack _ 754 006. The Chief Commandant, BCoy, Central lndustrial Security Force, KRTC, Mundali, Cuttack - 754 006 lng Oy llspegtor General, Central lndustrial Security Force. KRTC, Mundali, Cuttack - 754 006 One CC to SRI B ASHOK, Advocate tOpUCl one cc to SRt GAD| PRAVEEN KUMAR, Di SOL|C|TOR GENERAL OF rNDrA [OPUC] Two CD Copies To 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PSK, BS s HIGH COUFIT DATED:061A'112025 ORDER WP.No.22967 of 2016 t ,) l,-. e oR 1[i E S t4 17 lu[ M t$f i \ ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @wt &.o=- --ro\o\( I I I