HighlightsAllahabad High Court has directed Moradabad’s Krishna Kumar to be reinstated in service after 23 yearsThe High Court has mentioned that if the petitioner isn’t discovered match, then he needs to be posted within the workplace. Police recruitment of Krishna Kumar, a resident of Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, in 1998 The choice happened in Anandraj, Prayagraj The Allahabad High Court has directed the Moradabad’s Krishna Kumar, who was chosen within the 1998 police recruitment, to be reinstated in service after 23 years. The courtroom has mentioned that if the petitioner isn’t discovered match, then he needs to be posted within the workplace. SP Personnel Incharge DIG Establishment UP had refused to offer appointment on account of hiding information within the verification affidavit. If the appointment was not given even after the order of reconsideration of the courtroom, the courtroom mentioned that it isn’t acceptable to order the division to think about it after 23 years of recruitment. Therefore mentioned that the petitioner needs to be reinstated. But he is not going to be entitled to the arrears of wage. This is the case Krishna Kumar, a resident of Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, was chosen within the police recruitment in 1998. But within the yr 1991, an FIR was registered in opposition to him in a prison case. Which he didn’t point out whereas making use of for the job in police recruitment. The petitioner Krishna Kumar was alleged to have hid this reality. A case of dishonest was additionally registered in opposition to him for hiding information. During this, Krishna Kumar filed a petition within the Allahabad High Court. Hearing on which this order has been given by Justice Saral Srivastava. Advocate Rajesh Yadav argued for the petitioner on this matter. It mentioned that the petitioner was chosen within the 1998 Police Recruitment. A prison case was registered in opposition to him in 1991. In which he has been acquitted in 1999. The courtroom directed to offer appointment, a case of fraud was registered on the petitioner Krishna Kumar for giving incorrect info. On the idea of which the appointment was not made. This order dated 4 August 2017 was challenged. The courtroom mentioned that when the High Court quashed the order of refusal of appointment on suppression of knowledge and directed for reconsideration, it isn’t appropriate to refuse to re-appointment on the identical floor. The petitioner has been acquitted within the prison case. So there is no such thing as a level in dishonest case. The courtroom mentioned that as an alternative of sending it to the division after 23 years, it will be acceptable to offer instructions and directed the petitioner to be posted within the police or within the workplace on the publish of constable.