CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12965 OF 2009 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 25,2009 Amar Singh .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Petitioner has been denied appointment as constable general duty for which he stands selected as a candidate belonging to scheduled caste category on the ground that he is involved in a criminal case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 506 and 34 IPC. The petitioner, thus, prays for direction for his appointment irrespective of pendency of this criminal case against him on the ground that the offences alleged against him are not such which are involving moral turpitude and so he cannot be denied appointment CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12965 OF 2009 :{ 2 }: merely because of pendency of this criminal proceeding. The petitioner has placed reliance on some instructions issued in this regard in support of his submission. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner can be so appointed. First, he refers to instructions issued by Director General of Police on 2.7.2007 clarifying for the Chairman of the Selection Board for appointment of candidates, who had been acquitted before and after submission of the forms for recruitment as constables. This clearly provides that all those candidates who are facing trial for criminal offences will not be considered for appointment as constables. There is another communication dated 13.7.2007 in continuation of communication dated 2.7.2007, which is relied upon by the counsel. The relevant portion of this communication dated 13.11.2007 reads as under:- “This matter has been further examined and clarification conveyed vide this office letter referred to above is modified as under:- a) Candidates against whom cases are pending should be considered for allotment of Constabulary number except those who are facing investigation/trial or have been convicted in offences, involving moral turpitude. b) The candidates acquitted on technical grounds in offences involving moral turpitude, shall also not be considered for allotment of constabulary number.” This letter does provide that the candidates against whom cases are pending should be considered for allotment of constabulary numbers except those who are facing investigation/trial CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12965 OF 2009 :{ 3 }: or have been convicted in offences involving moral turpitude. This, thus, conveys an impression that those candidates against whom the cases are pending should be considered for allotment of constabulary numbers except those cases where the offences are involving moral turpitude. This clarificatory letter appears to have been issued only concerning some particular appointment as the heading thereof would suggest which reads:- “Allotment of constabulary numbers to the selected candidates for filling up 3700 posts of constables”. The present selection, however, relates to selection of 1940 constables, advertisement for which is issued on 5.10.2007. In this advertisement, it was clearly mentioned that a candidate against whom criminal case stands registered or is under investigation or pending trial or has been convicted by a court of law need not apply. Still, some of the persons approached this court by way of writ petition which was disposed of with the directions to treat the writ petition as a representation and to reconsider their case for appointment in view of rules and instructions or the guidelines issued in this regard. Strictly speaking, these orders and instructions are issued for a particular appointment and accordingly some instructions for recruitment for recruitment of 1940 male constables were also issued concerning this advertisement. Though these instructions dated 3.2.2009 have not been placed on record in this writ petition, but came to the notice of this court in another writ petition. These instructions read as under:- “1. If a candidate was acquitted before the date of appearance of the advertisement for applying CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12965 OF 2009 :{ 4 }: (i.e.23.08.2007), he shall be given appointment/regimental number, if he fulfills all other mandatory requirements. 2. If a candidate got involved in a criminal case (non- moral turpitude category), after applying for the post of constable, which is under trial or under investigation, shall also be eligible for appointment. 3. Following will NOT be eligible for appointment. (i) Those who had criminal cases pending at the time of advertisement and submission of applications. (ii) those who got involved in criminal cases of “Moral Turpitude” AFTER the date of the advertisement/application.” Some distinction appears to have been drawn for appointment of those persons who are involved in criminal cases pending against them at the time of advertisement and those who get involved in criminal cases after the date of advertisement. It is noticed that those who had a criminal case pending at the time of advertisement and submission of the application will not be eligible for appointment. This appears to be on the basis of conditions laid down in the advertisement that persons involved in criminal cases need not apply. The last date for application in this case was 23.10.2007. The petitioner got involved in this FIR on 24.4.2008. As per the instructions dated 3.2.2009, if the petitioner got involved in a criminal case (non-moral turpitude category) after applying for the post of constable which is under trial or investigation, then he shall be eligible for appointment. These instructions dated 3.2.2009, CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12965 OF 2009 :{ 5 }: however, were not brought to the notice of the court while dealing with the writ petition. Further it is noticed that some of the similar situated persons have been given constabulary number, who were candidates pursuant to the present advertisement, but have been given appointment and constabulary number. In one of the case, the writ petition was directed to be treated as representation and the Director General of Police himself has allowed the said petitioners to join service. Copy of this order has been annexed with the record as Annexure P-10. Reference is also made to decision of Division Bench in this regard dated 2.5.2008, which is allowed. Thus, while declining to interfere in the writ petition at this stage as legal notice is pending, direction is issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the law and the instructions issued in regard to this advertisement by treating this writ petition as a representation, in addition to the legal notice which has already been served by the petitioner and is pending decision. Let this decision be taken within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. August 25, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE