In a landmark decision, the Kerala High Court has directed the State Government to appoint Jijin R. as a Police Constable (Driver) under the compassionate employment scheme, despite his past involvement in multiple criminal cases. The Court emphasized that there was no relevant connection—or "nexus"—between the offences and the nature of the job applied for.
"We are not approaching this case through the lens of either the honourable acquittal test or the proximate test. Instead, we adopt a distinct line of analysis grounded in the nexus test," the Division Bench stated.
Read also:- Punjab & Haryana HC Slams Prosecution for Delay, Grants Bail in NDPS Case Over Witness Absence
Jijin, aged 36, belongs to the Ezhava community and lost his mother, a part-time sweeper in the Police Department, in 2017. He was offered the post under the compassionate scheme but was later denied due to six criminal cases registered against him between 2012 and 2019. These included minor offences like public drinking, making gestures at women, trespass, assault, and a matrimonial dispute which was later settled.
Despite facing rejection by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Jijin approached the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. The Court considered not only the nature of the offences but also his socio-economic background and lack of higher education.
"He had no dream about his future… he never thought that he would have a chance to improve until the moment came in the form of an opportunity that knocked at his door."
Read also:- Rajasthan HC Quashes Termination of Compassionate Appointee After 15 Years, Cites Humanitarian Grounds
The Court highlighted that Jijin had suffered a day’s imprisonment and paid fines in some cases, while in others he was acquitted. Importantly, none of the offences were of a nature that would impair the public trust essential for the role of a police driver, which does not involve discretionary authority or direct public interface.
“The primary consideration is whether the position sought requires a high degree of public trust or involves the exercise of discretionary authority.”
Referring to the Avtar Singh v. Union of India (2016) and Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. (2024) judgments, the Court stressed that public employment cannot be denied based solely on outdated criminal records, especially when the offences are unrelated to the job.
Read also:- Consumer Forum Must Allow Rebuttal Evidence, Cannot Decide Cases Summarily: J&K High Court
“Broad-brushing every non-disclosure as a disqualification will be unjust… it can never be a one-size-fits-all scenario.”
The judges also noted the non-disclosure of criminal cases in the verification form. However, since the relevant clause was written only in English and the petitioner’s education level was limited to SSLC, the Court ruled the omission as non-material.
"It is high time for the Government to incorporate such a change in the questionnaire to include clause 19 in Malayalam as well."
In conclusion, the Court set aside the earlier Tribunal order and directed the State Government to appoint Jijin within four weeks.
Case Title: Jijin R. v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Case No: OP(KAT) No. 72 of 2025
Judges: Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Johnson John