G.R.MOOLCHANDANI,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The respondent applied for the post of Constable in C.I.S.F. While filling up the enrollment form he clearly mentioned therein that he was an accused for having committed offences punishable under Sections 147, 341, 323, 452, 325 and 308 IPC. He mentioned that he was acquitted. Appointment was denied on the ground that the acquittal was not honourable. For such offences which were compoundable a settlement was made with the accused and for such which were not compoundable the witnesses had turned hostile. It was highlighted by the Screening Committee that the offences involved moral turpitude.
(3.) Writ petition filed by the respondent has been allowed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment dated 01.09.2017 noting that there were conflicting views of the different Benches of the Supreme Court resulting in a three Bench decision being pronounced which is reported as (2016) 8 SCC 471, Avtar Singh v. Union of India and Ors. The learned Single Judge has noted that various directions were issued by the Supreme Court in paragraph 38 of the decision and without highlighting as to which direction was found to be applicable by the learned Single Judge, view taken is that the respondent has to be appointed as a Constable with notional benefits.;