- (1.) Petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army through B.R.O. Varanasi on 2-3 -- 1988 and thereafter the Petitioner completed six months basic training and subsequently also completed trade training success-fully. By an order, dated 28-6-1990. the Petitioner was discharged from service. The exact order of discharge as passed against the Petitioner is given below : Discharge Certificate in accordance with the EME records office Instructions no. 4/49 in Respect of No. 14610655 N RECT/VM (MV) Shivkumar Singh. Discharged in consequence of "Service no longer required" under IV of the table below Army Rule 13 of 1954, after having served for 2 years and 116 days with the colours and NIL years NIL days in reserve. Sd. Jagdish Singh Col. Co 607 EME Eg.28 June, 1990
(2.) The Petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order by means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India, mainly contending that the said order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing or show cause to the Petitioner. The order is in violation of the principles of natural justice and order does not conform with the requirement of rule 169(e) of the Army Rules.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents wherein it has been stated that the Petitioner has given a false information regarding his civil life. There was Criminal case no. 130-A of 1984, under Section 147, 323, 324 and 325 IPC pending against the Petitioner in the Court of the Addl. District Magistrate, Mohammedabad. This fact was concealed by the Petitioner at the time of his enrolment. The fact has come to the light only when the police verification was officially received in the Centre. The police verification states that the aforesaid case is still pending in the Court. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the Petitioner has given a false answer to a question (J) in the prescribed form of verification. The question was in the following form : Is any case pending against you in any Court of law at the time of filling up this verification roll ? The Petitioner answered "NO" to the said question, thereby the Petitioner gave a false statement for his enrolment as a soldier and on the aforesaid basis, the Petitioner has been discharged in accordance with the Rules.;