THAVA MURUGAN AND ORS ETC Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, DIRECTOR, TAMIL NADU UNIFORMED SERVICE RECRUITMENT BOARD AND SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND ORS ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners were aspirants for the post of Police Constable, Grade II. They had appeared for the selection and they were selected and since their selection was cancelled by invoking the Rule 14(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, they have come forward to file the present writ petitions.

(2.) Under the relevant rule, the appointing authority must be satisfied before the appointment is made regarding the character and antecedents of the candidates in question. For the purpose of ascertaining the character and antecedents, the candidates were requested to fill up the forms in which they will have to indicate that there was no criminal case pending against them or they were not involved in any criminal case. If the columns are not filled up either indicating positively or negatively or if there is any attempt to suppress such vital information, it is open to the authorities to cancel the appointment/selection made in their favour.

(3.) If candidate fill up the columns found in the form suppressing vital information regarding pendency of criminal case or being involved in criminal activity, the Supreme Court in R. Radhakrishnan v. Director General of Police and Ors., 2008 1 SCC 660 has held that selection can be made and the candidate has no further right to challenge and even in such cases, the question of principles of natural justice are not attracted.