Provisional Appointment for Departmental Candidate Becomes Permanent Upon Exoneration and Removal from Secret List.

The applicant, Vinod Kumar, a Head Constable, participated in the 2012 Staff Selection Commission (SSC) selection process for Sub-Inspector (Executive) posts.

Initially, his name was not declared due to his departmental candidate status.

Aggrieved, he filed OA No. 1812/2013, leading to directions to redraw the final result on 17.09.2014.

Non-compliance led to Contempt Petition No. 686/2014, which closed on 16.10.2015.

Subsequently, the applicant received a Show Cause Notice (SCN) on 16.10.2015, based on his disclosure in the attestation form regarding FIR No. 114/2008 under Section 7/13 POC Act.

Although a similarly placed individual, Chandan Paswan, had his case considered, the applicant's case was deferred.

The applicant filed OA No. 4384/2015, which was disposed of on 02.12.2015, directing a final order on the SCN.

Due to further non-compliance, Contempt Petition No. 758/2015 was filed.

In response to the contempt petition, the respondents issued an order dated 30.12.2015, withdrawing the SCN but keeping the applicant's appointment in abeyance pending completion of the investigation in FIR No. 114/2008.

The applicant was later provisionally appointed as SI (Exe.) on 15.02.2016, subject to the outcome of the instant OA and referral to a Screening Committee if no charge sheet was filed.

The applicant was appointed Constable (Exe.) on 08.05.2001.

FIR No. 114/2008 was registered against several police personnel, including the applicant.

The applicant was later discharged by the Court on 14.09.2022.

A disciplinary inquiry was ordered on 20.03.2009, and his name was placed on the Secret List of doubtful integrity.

However, he was exonerated in the disciplinary inquiry on 14.02.2011, and his name was removed from the Secret List on 14.06.2012.

During the criminal investigation, his name was also removed from the list of accused on 14.05.2012.

The applicant was promoted to Head Constable after his sealed cover recommendation was opened, effective 20.06.2013.

No charge sheet has been filed against him in FIR No. 114/2008.

Whether the deferment of the applicant's appointment as Sub-Inspector (Executive) by the respondents, as per the order dated 30.12.2015, was legally sustainable.

Whether the condition in the order dated 30.12.2015, requiring the applicant's case to be referred to a Screening Committee under Standing Order No. 398/2010 if no charge sheet is filed, is warranted.

The Tribunal primarily applied the principles of fair and just administrative action, specifically regarding the non-deferment of appointment when an employee has been exonerated and discharged from criminal proceedings.

It considered the directives issued in previous OAs and Contempt Petitions filed by the applicant, which sought the completion of the selection process and finalization of his appointment.

The court also implicitly relied on the general principles of service law that an employee should not be penalized or have their career progression held in abeyance indefinitely based on unproven or previously cleared charges.

The Tribunal also assessed the applicability and ingredients of Standing Order No. 398/2010, which pertains to concealment/suppression of information, false declarations, or furnishing forged documents, as well as disclosure of involvement/arrest/acquittal/discharge in criminal cases.

The Tribunal analyzed the facts and the respondents' actions in light of the applicant's consistent exoneration and discharge from the criminal case as well as the disciplinary inquiry.

It noted that the applicant had explicitly disclosed the FIR in his attestation form, negating any allegation of concealment, which is a primary ingredient of Standing Order No. 398/2010.

Furthermore, the investigation in FIR No. 114/2008 had concluded with the removal of the applicant's name from the list of accused on 14.05.2012, and no charge sheet was filed against him.

The disciplinary authority had also exonerated him on 14.02.2011, and his name was removed from the Secret List of doubtful integrity on 14.06.2012.

The Tribunal observed that the applicant had even been promoted to Head Constable after the sealed cover containing his DPC recommendations was opened.

Given these developments, the Tribunal concluded that none of the conditions or "ingredients" for applying Standing Order No. 398/2010 were present or attracted in the instant case.

Therefore, the continued deferment of his appointment and the stipulation for a Screening Committee review were deemed unwarranted and legally unsustainable, especially as he had successfully completed his training and had been performing duties as SI (Exe.) for over 10 years.

The previous orders of the Tribunal, which the respondents had initially failed to comply with, further reinforced the applicant's right to appointment.

The respondents were directed to confirm/regularize the provisional appointment of the applicant as Sub-Inspector (Executive), which was granted in pursuance of the Tribunal's order dated 12.01.2016, with all consequential benefits as accorded to his batch-mates.