Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MANOJ KUMAR versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME) AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Manoj Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru' Principal Secretary (Home) And Others - WRIT - A No. 56838 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 19199 (14 November 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 56838 of 2006

Manoj Kumar

  Vs.

State of U.P.  and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla, J.

Director General of Police, U.P. Lucknow, advertised vacancies for the post of Sub-Inspector (Civil Police) and Platoon Commander (P.A.C.). Petitioner applied and was declared successful in Physical examination.  Admit card was issued to him for appearing in written examination. Petitioner successfully  passed main examination and undertook interview and medical test also. Thereafter, final select list was published wherein name of petitioner figured. Proceedings for character verification started and in the said verification, report has been sent by the District Magistrate to Police Head Quarter that petitioner was implicated in case crime No.531 of 2002 and was acquitted by Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut on 07.05.2005. Petitioner has contended that recital of fact which has been mentioned is totally incorrect. One NCR was lodged against petitioner on 23.09.2002 under Section 323 and 504 I.P.C. At police station Kankankhera, District Meerut, wherein name of petitioner was mentioned. In the said criminal case local police after investigation found nomination of petitioner false and only two  incumbents were charge sheeted. Petitioner has contended that he has not been arrayed as accused in the aforementioned criminal case and the report to this effect has also been accepted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Petitioner has contended that he has no knowledge, notice or information about any other criminal case against him prior to his selection, nor was any investigation conducted by police against him except for the NCR referred to above, in which too, he was not charge sheeted. Petitioner has contended that his candidature has been arbitrarily withheld and the report of the District Magistrate is incorrect.

On various occasions, opportunity has been provided to the State, but no counter affidavit has been filed. As to whether  in NCR lodged on 23.09.2002 under Section 323 and 504 I.P.C., petitioner had been charge sheeted or not, and as to whether petitioner was accused in case crime No.531 of 2002  or not are questions of fact and requires enquiry and investigation. Petitioner has categorically mentioned  that at no point of time he was investigated by police nor had he any notice, knowledge or information of the aforementioned proceedings, as such the said case cannot be made foundation and basis for non-suiting his candidature.

As to whether  in NCR dated 23.09.2002 under Section 323 and 504 I.P.C., petitioner had been charge sheeted or not; as to whether petitioner was accused in case crime No.531 of 2002  or not, and as to whether petitioner had any notice, knowledge or information of the aforementioned proceedings or not, are essentially questions of fact and need enquiry and investigation, as such liberty is given to the petitioner to make a representation before the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Establishment), Police Head Quarter, Allahabad, within three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order.  On such a representation being made, the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Establishment), Police Head Quarter, Allahabad will get the enquiry and investigation made afresh qua the notice to petitioner of said proceeding, and thereafter, shall take appropriate decision on the same, in accordance with law, within six weeks  from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order, and the decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner.

In terms of aforesaid observations and direction writ petition is disposed of.

14.11.2006

SRY


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.