HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD THE HON'BLE AJAY BHANOT, J. Writ-A No. 5720 of 2019 Kailash Chaudhary ...Petitioner Versus State of U.P. & Anr. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Ishan Deo Giri Counsel for the Respondents: C.S.C. A. Service Law – Appointment – Suppression of material information - The information sought by the employer if not disclosed as required, would definitely amount to suppression of material information - The pendency of a criminal case/proceeding is different from suppressing the information of such pendency. The case pending against a person might not involve moral turpitude but suppressing of this information itself amounts to moral turpitude. (Para 16) The petitioner was fully aware of the pendency of the multiple criminal cases against him. It was observed that the declaration was false and made with the deliberate intention to mislead the authority and to secure employment in the police. The suppression of the fact of pendency of multiple criminal cases thus assumed significance, and became a material consideration for invalidation of his candidature. The candidature of the petitioner was liable to invalidated, and was rightly cancelled by the competent authority. (Para 14) Personnel in uniform belonging to disciplined forces, are expected to bear impeccable character and to possess unimpeachable integrity. No relaxation or compromise with the highest standards of character and integrity can be permitted. (Para 15) Writ Petition dismissed. ( E-4) Precedent followed: 1. Avtar Singh Vs U.O.I. & ors., (2016) 8 SCC 471 (Para 5, 6, 13) 2. Devendra Kumar Vs. St. of Uttaranchal, (2013) 9 SCC 363 (Para 16) Present petition challenges order dated 28.01.2019, by which the petitioner’s candidature for appointment on the post of Constable in the U.P. Police, has been invalidated. (Delivered by Hon’b le Ajay Bhanot, J.) 1. By the order dated 28.01.2019, the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post o f Constable in the U.P. Police, has been invalidated. 2. The impugned order dated 28.01.2019 records that the petitioner had tender ed a declaration on oath in the form of an affidavit sworn on 11.06. 2018, wherein he categorically asserted that (i) no criminal cases were pending against him, (ii) no criminal case was registered against him in his knowledge (iii) no police investigation was pending against him (iv) the petitioner has never been arrested in any criminal case. The said eclaration in the form of an affidavit also asserts that in future if any of the aforesaid facts are found to be false or it is found that the petitioner h ad suppressed any material facts, the petitioner shall not be permitted to join training course and his candidature shall be invalidated. 3. The petitioner suppressed the details of three criminal cases pending against him in the aforesaid declaration on oath regarding the pendency of the criminal cases. The impugned order dated 28.01.2019 cancelled the candidature of the petitioner on the foot of suppression of material facts and assertion of false facts. 4. Shri Is han Deo Giri, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly contends that the petitioner admittedly did not disclose the pendency of the three criminal cases, while filing the declaration on oath in the form of an affidavit.