Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) -Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner has filed this petition against his termination from service vide impugned order dated 28.10.1996, passed by the Commandant, First Battalion Indo Tibetan Border Police Force (respondent No. 2) and for a direction to the respondents to allow him to participate in Commando training. A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner was selected for the post of Constable in Indo Tibetan Border Police Force in 1995 after going through several physical tests and other formalities. After selection the petitioner was directed by the Head Constable to fill up a recruitment form including Character and Antecedents Verification Roll (Form No. I.T.B.P.-25) bearing column 12 (Ka) and (Kha) relating to character and antecedents. The petitioner alleges to have filled up and signed the form on 15.12.1995. The petitioner was thereafter appointed as a Constable in Indo Tibetan Border Police Force and was sent for training at Mussoorie on 30.12.1995 alongwith other similarly appointed constables which he completed on 6.10.1996, from which date the training of Commando was to be started for which also he was selected. It appears that during the aforesaid training a show cause notice dated 23.9.1996 was issued to the petitioner for concealment of facts in the Character and Antecedents Verification Roll (Form No. I.T.B.P.-25) with regard to pendency .of two criminal cases against him at the time of recruitment of constables.
(3.) THE petitioner alleges to have submitted his reply dated 12.10.1996 to the aforesaid show-cause notice. However, vide impugned order dated 28.10.1996 respondent No. 2 terminated the services of the petitioner on the basis of report of the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, that two criminal cases were pending against the petitioner at the time of his recruitment which the petitioner concealed while filling column Nos. 12 (Ka) and (Kha) of the Character and Antecedents Verification Roll (Form No. I.T.B.P.-25) relating to verification of character and antecedents after his recruitment. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in Criminal Case No. 203/92 under Sections 323, 504 and 427, I.P.C. read with Section 13 (i) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Atrocities) Prevention Act neither any process was issued nor the petitioner was ever summoned by the Court nor the Investigating Officer came to his house in connection with investigation of the aforesaid case, as such he had no knowledge of pendency of the aforesaid case against him.;