- (1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for issuance of direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Constable on the basis of selection made in the month of October 2004 with all consequential benefits regarding back wages and seniority. However, at the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined the prayer to the allotment of belt number because in fact the petitioner was selected and appointed to the post of Constable. The basic reason for non-allotment of belt number to the petitioner is that the petitioner has omitted to disclose in the application form that he had earlier been arrested in a criminal case, although before the advertisement was issued, the petitioner was acquitted on November 9, 2002 (P- 3). It has come on record that the petitioner was arrested in case FIR No. 43 dated July 20, 2002, under Sections 323/341/34 IPC, Police Station Rohrai. However, he was acquitted on November 9, 2002 (P-3) as the prosecution had miserably failed to connect the petitioner with the commission of offences, he was charged with. The advertisement was issued on July 1, 2003 (P-3), wherein, in the proforma annexure P-1 Column 11, he did not furnish the information under the following head : "11. If you ever been arrested, if so, then explain in detail along with present-position of the case."
(2.) On the basis of omission to furnish the information against Column 11, the constabulary number of the petitioner is being with held. The matter is not res Integra as a Division Bench of this Court in Lalit Kumar v. State of Haryana and others (C.W.P. No. 14028 of 2003, decided on February 27, 2004) in some what similar circumstances has allowed the writ petition holding that it was a fit case for appointment even if the pendency of the case was not mentioned in the original application. On the basis of the opinion expressed by the Superintendent of Police, Commando, Haryana, the writ petition was allowed. If in a case where the information has been concealed with regard to a pending criminal case, we see no reason to take any different view. In the present case the information has not been furnished with regard to an old case where the petitioner has been acquitted. Therefore, we take the same view and direct respondent No. 3 to allot the constabulary number to the petitioner. The needful shall be done with a period of two months from the date, a certified copy of this order is presented to them. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits with regard to salary, leave, seniority etc. However, this shall not be treated as a precedent.
(3.) The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Order accordingly.;