M ABDUL RAHIM Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has stated that he had entered the Police Subordinate Service, on 17.1.1968, as a directly recruited Grade-II Police Constable. Subsequently, he had been promoted as a Grade-I Police Constable and as a Head Constable, on 23.7.2002, based on his seniority and merit. While so, the respondents had advertised for selection to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police, by direct recruitment from amongst the departmental candidates in the year 1997-1998. Following the advertisement, the petitioner, who is a graduate, had applied for being selected to the said post. He belongs to the backward class community and he was fully qualified for being selected.

(2.) DURING the physical efficiency test conducted, on 15.7.1998, he had secured 45 marks. Thereafter, he had been directed to appear for a written test, on 19.7.1998, in which he had secured more than 50% of the 40 marks earmarked for the said test. Thus, he had become eligible to attend the viva-voce test, which had been held, on 11.12.1998. Based on the call letter, the petitioner had appeared for the viva-voce examination, in which he had answered all the questions, very well. However, the petitioner did not receive the call letter, which had been issued by the second respondent to various other candidates, directing them to appear for the medical examination, which is the next stage in the process of selection. The petitioner had made a representation to the second and the third respondents, on 1.3.2000 and had also issued reminders on 1.3.2001 and 19.10.2001. However, there was no response to the representations sent by the petitioner.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the petitioner had in fact got 55.75 as the total marks. Even if the petitioner had been awarded 9.5 marks for the interview he would have got only 56.25 marks in total, whereas, the required cut off marks, under the backward class category was 56.75. It had also been stated that some of the candidates had approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal challenging the Range-wise selection mentioned in the recruitment notification. The Tribunal had given a finding that the selection of departmental candidates for the post of Sub-INspector of police, for the year 1997-1998, had not been done on Zone-wise basis and had also held that the direct recruitment to the post of Sub-INspector of police made on Zone-wise basis was bad in law. However, the Tribunal was not inclined to set aside the entire selection process already made.