Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) Instant writ petition has been filed against order dated 10.11.2003 (Annexure-7) whereby candidature of petitioner has been rejected after his selection by Rajasthan Public Service Commission ("PSC") for the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor Gr. II ("APP") on the premises that he suppressed material information while not disclosing it in his application form (Annexure R-1) so also in attestation form (Annexure R-2), about criminal case registered against him for offence punishable under Section 3/6 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 ("the Act"), wherein he was convicted but was released on probation for one year with direction to deposit Rs. 200/- as prosecution expenses.
(2.) Admitted facts, in brief, are that post of A.P.P. Gr. II, was advertised by R.P.S.C., pursuant to which petitioner being LL.B, qualified and eligible, applied for consideration of his candidature and participated in process of selection, and qualified written examination and interview and was informed vide letter (Annexure-3) that his name finds place at S.No. M-52 and was forwarded by P.S.C. to respondent No. 2. At this stage when his case was sent for police verification, respondent No. 2 was informed that petitioner was convicted in Cr. Case No. 973/99 under Section 3/6 of the Act after regular trial wherein statements of prosecution witnesses were recorded and his statement was recorded under Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code. where he pleaded guilty and did not produce any evidence in defence and consequently convicted of criminal offence charged (supra). This fact of conviction was suppressed by him, by not disclosing in his application form filled seeking appointment for the post of APP Gr. II so also in attestation form. Thus, his very selection was cancelled vide order dated 10.11.2003 (Annexure-8). Hence, this petition.
(3.) Counsel for petitioner vehemently contends that petitioner pleaded guilty for the reason that Presiding Officer assured him that his conviction will not cause any prejudice for his future career in Government service as would be evident from judgment dated 20.4.2001 (Annexure-9) and in such circumstances, he remained under bona fide impression that since it will not come in his way while seeking appointment in Government, he did not consider proper to mention these facts in the application so also attestation form and that being so, it cannot be said to be a case of suppression of material information and accordingly, denial of appointment on this premise despite his final selection is arbitrary and also in violation of principles of natural justice.;