Tribunal quashes railway's rejection of job appointment for convict

The Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal recently quashed an order issued by the Divisional Railway Manager, Ambala Cantt, which had denied a selected candidate, Pardeep Kumar, from joining a government job due to his prior conviction under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with voluntarily causing hurt.

Pardeep Kumar, a resident of Haryana, had applied for the position of Track Man in the OBC category when the Northern Railway advertised various vacancies in 2012. He successfully cleared the selection process and received an offer of appointment through a letter dated August 2, 2014. The letter instructed him to report to the office of the Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt, on September 11, 2014, to join.

However, despite submitting the required documents, Kumar was not allowed to join due to an ongoing criminal case against him. The case, filed in January 2010, involved charges under Sections 323, 325 and 34 IPC. He made repeated requests to the Railway authorities to provisionally appoint him or keep the post vacant until the case was resolved. On January 19, 2017, the court disposed of the case and acquitted him of the charge under Section 325 IPC; however, he was convicted under Section 323 IPC. He was subsequently released on probation.

After the court's decision, Kumar approached the Railway authorities again to join the service; however, his application was rejected on October 25, 2017. The Railway cited his conviction, despite the probation order, as the reason for the denial.

Kumar challenged this rejection, arguing since he had been acquitted of the more serious charge and was released on probation, he should not be disqualified from employment. His legal counsel, Advocate Aditya Yadav, contended the Railway's action was illegal and unjustified.

The Railway's counsel argued probation only affected the sentence and not the conviction. They maintained the conviction stood and therefore, Kumar was not eligible for appointment.

After hearing the arguments, the Tribunal, comprising members Rashmi Saxena Sahni and Suresh Kumar Batra, referenced a ruling by the Allahabad High Court. The court had previously held an offence under Section 323 IPC is not considered an offence of moral turpitude. Consequently, a person convicted under this section and released on probation should not incur any disqualification for government employment, as per Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

In light of this, the Tribunal declared the Railway's rejection of Kumar's application on October 25, 2017, as illegal. The Tribunal directed the Railway authorities to issue a reasoned and speaking order within two months from the receipt of the certified copy of the order.

This decision reinforces the principle a conviction under Section 323 IPC, when followed by probation, does not disqualify an individual from public employment, particularly when the offence is not considered to be of moral turpitude.