Sangeeta Chandra, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondent.
(2.) On the basis of instruction dated 29.9.2018, learned Standing Counsel informs that the petitioner was selected candidate but in character verification it has come up that an N.C.R. No.25/2017 has been filed against the petitioner in P.S. Jangipur, district Ghazipur under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C., in which on 29.5.2017, charge sheet has been submitted to the competent trial court by the Investigation Officer. Criminal proceedings being pending against the petition, he has not been permitted to join. Learned counsel for State-respondent has also pointed out that in the writ petition, the petitioner has stated that he was allowed to join training and he completed his training and thereafter was asked to leave. However, in the instructions, it has been specifically sated that the petitioner was never permitted to join.
(3.) Be that as it may. Since no final order has been passed by the competent appointing authority with regard to the candidature of the petitioner or its cancellation and he has not been permitted to join, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a detailed representation within a period of ten days from today to the Superintendent of Police, Amethi. The Superintendent of Police, Amethi shall consider the representation of petitioner in the light of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and Others, 2016 8 SCC 471 and pass a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law within a further period of four weeks.;