CW 11643/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.11643/2008 Mukesh Kr. Arvind Versus State & Anr. Date of Order ::: 17/12/08 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. DV Tholia, for petitioner Mr. GD Bansal, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for respondent-State Since the reply has been filed, at joint request, it has been finally heard for disposal at admission stage. Instant petition has been filed assailing action of respondents denying appointment to the petitioner on the pretext of challan being filed in a criminal case against petitioner. A short term advertisement was issued by respondent NO.4 on 21/04/08 (Ann.1) for appointment on contract basis to the post of General Nurse & Midwife (“GNM”) under the Scheme of National Rural Health Mission. Petitioner being eligible applied for the post and finally he was called for interview on 11/08/08 vide letter dt.31/07/08 (Ann.3) and despite final selection as is evident from letter dt.12/09/08 (Ann.5), having not been disputed by respondents, when he was not considered for appointment, he submitted application before CW 11643/08 //2// competent authority and approached this Court by way of instant petition. However petitioner was informed that on police verification of his character, it was found that challan was filed against him in criminal case being registered and pending before competent court, which was considered to be basis for denial of his appointment. Counsel for petitioner submits that there is no requirement pursuant to advertisement to disclose in application form about criminal case/FIR registered or challan being filed against applicant; as such it is not the case of wilful suppression of material fact while at the same time, U/r 16 of Rajasthan Rural Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 2008 (“Rules, 2008”) even if a person being convict or ex-prisoner who by their disciplined life while in prison and by their subsequent good conduct, having proved to be completely reformed, can be considered eligible and qualified for appointment in Government service; in such circumstances, only in case of challan being filed as against instant petitioner, that could not be considered to be disqualification for denying appointment. In their reply, respondents inter-alia CW 11643/08 //3// averred that because at the time of character verification, a police report was received that FIR was registered against him for offences U/Ss 307, 341, & 323,IPC; and challan was filed U/S 341, 323, 324, 325/34, IPC – as a result of pendency of criminal case, it was not considered by authority to be appropriate for appointment of petitioner. I have considered contentions of Counsel for both the parties and with their assistance, pondered over material on record. Petitioner on being finally selected for the post of G.N.M., pursuant to advertisement dt.21/04/08 (Ann.1) in ordinary course was entitled for appointment after being placed in order of merit but he was denied of appointment only because of criminal case registered and pending against him. A bare perusal of R.16 of Rules, 2008 makes it clear that a convict by competent court and even a ex prisoner who by their disciplined life are proved to be reformed by subsequent good conduct are also considered to be qualified for appointment in government service provided conviction may not involve moral turpitude or violence. In instant case, only challan has been filed against petitioner for minor offences U/Ss 341, 323, 324, 325/34, IPC. No adverse inference CW 11643/08 //4// can be drawn at this stage about criminal case pending against petitioner. Petitioner must have submitted a certificate of good character as required U/r 16 of Rules, 2008. It is not the case of respondents that there was requirement for applicant to disclose about criminal case being registered or challan being filed; as such it could not be considered to be a case of wilful suppression of material facts while submitting application form pursuant to advertisement (Ann.1). Hence in the opinion of this Court, denial of appointment by respondents in no manner can be held to be justified and their action is certainly in violation of Art.14 of the Constitution. Consequently, writ petition succeeds and and is hereby allowed. Respondents are directed to consider candidature of the petitioner for appointment to the post of GNM pursuant to advertisement dt.21/04/08 (Ann.1) as per his order of merit assessed in course of his final selection, alongwith consequential benefits. Appropriate orders be passed within one month. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.4/11643CW08-1712-All.doc