Truthful disclosure and honourable acquittal preclude mechanical rejection of candidature based on prior criminal involvement.

The applicant applied for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) under Advertisement No. 07/2021 and was issued an offer of appointment on 25.03.2022

The applicant truthfully disclosed the pendency of a criminal case (FIR No. 89/2020) in his application and attestation forms

While the respondents granted extensions for joining until 25.07.2022, they refused to allow him to join when he reported on 18.07.2022, citing a lack of instructions and ongoing character verification

During the pendency of a related Writ Petition, the applicant was acquitted by the Trial Court on 08.09.2022

Following a prior direction from the Tribunal to reconsider the case, the respondents issued an impugned order dated 26.05.2025, rejecting the applicant’s candidature on the ground that the criminal case was pending at the time of the initial verification in August 2022

1. Whether the respondents were legally justified in rejecting the applicant's candidature based on the historical pendency of a criminal case despite his truthful disclosure and subsequent honorable acquittal

2. Whether the impugned order dated 26.05.2025 suffered from non-application of mind by failing to consider the applicant's acquittal

The Tribunal primarily applied the landmark judgment in Avtar Singh v. Union of India (2016) 8 SCC 471, which holds that in cases of truthful disclosure and acquittal, the employer must consider the nature of the acquittal and suitability in a fair, objective, and non-mechanical manner

It further relied on RBI v. Bhopal Singh Panchal (1994) 1 SCC 541, which establishes that an honorable acquittal removes the stigma of criminal proceedings

Conversely, the respondents relied on State of West Bengal v. Sk. Nazrul Islam (2011) 10 SCC 184 and Commissioner of Police v. Mehar Singh (2013) 7 SCC 685, which emphasize that selection does not confer an indefeasible right to appointment and is subject to character verification

The Tribunal observed that the applicant had maintained transparency regarding the pending FIR from the outset

It found that the respondents’ rejection was based solely on the status of the criminal case at the time of verification, entirely ignoring the subsequent honorable acquittal on 08.09.2022

The Tribunal reasoned that under the Avtar Singh principles, an employer cannot mechanically reject a candidate if an acquittal has cleared the candidate's record and no other adverse material exists

By failing to evaluate the nature of the acquittal—which was not on technical grounds—and by ignoring the fact that no criminal proceedings were currently pending, the respondents' decision was deemed arbitrary and reflective of a non-application of mind

It held that the applicant could not be denied appointment solely on the basis of a concluded criminal case where he had been honorably acquitted

The respondents were directed to appoint the applicant to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) within eight weeks, subject to other eligibility criteria

The applicant was granted notional consequential benefits from the date of appointment of his peers, though back wages were denied