The State of West
Bengal and Others Vs. Sk. Nazrul Islam
O R D E R
A. K. PATNAIK, J.
is an appeal against the order dated 14.09.2010 of the Division Bench of the Calcutta
High Court in W.P.S.T. No.1911 of 2008.
facts very briefly are that on 26.07.2007 the Police Directorate of West Bengal
notified recruitment of Constables in the West Bengal Police from Howrah District.
The name of the respondent was sponsored by the Employment Exchange, Uluberia, Howrah,
for recruitment as Constable and on 17.09.2007 the provisional select list was notified
in which the respondent's name found place at serial no.76. The respondent appeared
before the Medical Board and was found medically fit. On 28.09.2007, the
respondent was supplied a Verification Roll for verification of his antecedents
and the respondent filled the Verification Roll and submitted the same to the Reserve
Officer, Howrah, on 29.09.2007.
The Verification Roll
of the respondent was sent to the District Intelligence Branch, Howrah, on 08.10.2007.
In the course of enquiry, it came to light that he was involved in a criminal
case involving offences under Sections 148/323/380/427/596, IPC, in Bagnan PS
Case No.97 of 2007 and after investigation, the charge-sheet had already been
filed in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia, Howrah,
and that the respondent had surrendered before the Court and had been granted
bail. All these facts, however, had been concealed in column no.13 of the Verification
Roll submitted by the respondent in which he was required 3to state whether he was
ever arrested, detained or convicted. The authorities, therefore, did not
appoint the respondent as a Constable.
the respondent filed O.A.No.2500 of 2008 before the West Bengal Administrative
Tribunal for a direction upon the authorities to issue appointment letter in his
favour, but by order dated 25.07.2008 the Tribunal declined to grant any relief
to the respondent. The order of the Tribunal was challenged by the respondent before
the High Court and in the impugned order, the High Court held that the authorities
were not entitled to withhold the offer of appointment to the respondent and directed
the authorities to issue the letter of appointment in favour of the respondent
without any further delay. The High Court, however, observed in the impugned order
that the appointment of the respondent to the post of Constable will abide by
the final decision of the pending criminal case.
have heard learned counsel for the parties and we fail to appreciate how when a
criminal case under Sections 148/323/380/427/596, IPC, against the respondent
was pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia,
Howrah, any mandamus could have been issued by the High Court to the authorities
to appoint the respondent as a Constable. Surely, the authorities entrusted with
the responsibility of appointing constables were under duty to verify the
antecedents of a candidate to find out whether he is suitable for the post of
constable and so long as the candidate has not been acquitted in the criminal case
of the charges under Sections 148/323/380/427/596, IPC, he cannot possibly be held
to be suitable for appointment to the post of Constable.
therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the High Court and
dismiss the Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution filed by the
respondent in the High Court. There shall be no order as to costs.
(R. V. Raveendran)
(A. K. Patnaik)