CWP No. 13210 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 13210 of 2010 Date of decision 28 .7.2010 Ajit Kumar ... Petitioner Versus Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and others... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr.ABS Sidhu , Advocate for the petitioner 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against order dated 13.5.2010 passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (for brevity 'the Tribunal'). While disposing of the Original Application, the Tribunal has held that once a case has been registered against the petitioner although he was acquitted by the trial Court it would not necessarily result into conferring a right on him to claim appointment in a disciplinary force like Indian Reserve Battalion for Union Territory, Chandigarh. The Tribunal has rightly placed reliance on a judgement of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Administration v. Sushil Kumar (1996)11 SCC 605 and held that the view taken by the appointing authority cannot be considered as wholly unwarranted and no direction for reconsideration of the case after acquittal could be given. The conduct or character of a candidate to be appointed in a disciplinary force is material and not the actual result emerging from the prosecution which may end up even in acquittal. CWP No. 13210 of 2010 2 Having heard the learned counsel we find no merit in the petition. Dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (A. N. Jindal ) 28.7.2010 Judge okg