Overview
- A division bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra held in an October 16 order that a conviction dealt with under the Juvenile Justice law does not operate as a service disqualification.
- Relying on Section 19 of the 2000 Act and its counterpart Section 24 of the 2015 Act, the court emphasized the non‑obstante clause shielding juveniles from disqualifications attaching to conviction.
- The court found the 2015 Act’s Section 24(1) proviso inapplicable because the offence and FIR dated back to 2011, referencing transitional provisions to apply the law in force at that time.
- Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India v. Ramesh Bishnoi, the bench said requiring disclosure of a juvenile offence violates rights to privacy and reputation.
- Setting aside a Central Administrative Tribunal directive for a fresh inquiry under Avtar Singh, the court reinstated Pundarikaksh Dev Pathak, a Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya appointee in Amethi, with consequential benefits.