#police recruitment

The Supreme Court admitted an appeal by a UP Police constable candidate rejected by the departmental medical board for alleged squint, despite two independent expert opinions from GSVM Medical College and UHM District Hospital certifying normal vision. The ruling will clarify whether expert medical evidence from reputable institutions can override a departmental board's adverse finding in recruitment.

Allahabad HC upholds the cancellation of a constable candidate's selection due to pending serious criminal cases, emphasizing that truthful disclosure does not override the state's discretion to assess character suitability for disciplined forces. The ruling reinforces that Rule 16 of the UP Police Constable Service Rules empowers authorities to reject candidates with adverse antecedents, even post-selection.

Allahabad HC quashed a police recruitment disqualification after a medical board confirmed the candidate's height met the required standard. The ruling underscores that procedural errors in physical verification cannot override substantive eligibility, reinforcing natural justice in employment selection.

CAT Jammu rules that denial of police appointment based solely on FIR registration violates natural justice, mandating consideration of exoneration via supplementary charge-sheet. The judgment reinforces that substantive evidence, not mere allegations, must guide employment decisions in government recruitments.

The Central Administrative Tribunal ruled that an acquittal by compromise in a mutual dispute involving cross-FIRs cannot lead to automatic disqualification for Delhi Police recruitment. The Screening Committee must conduct a holistic assessment of the candidate's character and the nature of the dispute before rejecting candidature.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that acquittal extinguishes any presumption of guilt, making mechanical disqualification from police recruitment for non-disclosure of such cases unconstitutional. This sets a critical precedent for fair character verification in public employment, protecting candidates from punitive assumptions based on legally closed proceedings.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that an acquittal secured through compromise between parties in a criminal case does not automatically satisfy the character verification standards for police recruitment. The Screening Committee retains final discretion to assess moral fitness, and its decision stands unless proven mala fide - reinforcing that public safety trumps procedural closure in sensitive service appointments.

Telangana High Court holds that deliberate non-compliance with a judicial order directing appointment of an acquitted candidate constitutes contempt under Sections 10-12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The court imposed two-month imprisonment and a fine on the recruitment board, emphasizing that judicial orders granting consequential benefits are binding on executive authorities and non-compliance undermines constitutional mandates.

Delhi High Court rules that acquittal due to hostile witnesses does not guarantee compassionate appointment, especially in disciplined forces like the police. Employers retain discretion to assess antecedents and suitability, and inordinate delays can defeat the scheme's purpose. The judgment reinforces that compassionate appointment is not a right but subject to employer evaluation.