V CHIDAMBARAM Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE; TAMIL NADU UNIFORMED SERVICES RECRUITMENT BOARD; SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SALEM RURAL; INSPECTOR OF POLICE PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT WING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent herein in his communication in Na.Ka.No.22733/appointment 1(2)/2009-2009 dated 10.06.2009, quash the same and for a direction to the respondents herein to appoint the petitioner in the post of Second Grade Constable in the existing vacancy.

(2.) The sum and substance of the case is that the petitioner was successful in the test conducted by the second respondent for the post of Second Grade Constable. Despite securing highest mark, he was not informed of the reasons for not selecting him to the said post. He has stated that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe and that persons, who have secured 48 marks, were appointed to the post of Second Grade Constable and he was not selected and the reason was not known to him. Subsequently, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 he collected the details, wherein the first respondent has sent a reply dated 10.06.2009 informing the petitioner that a criminal case in Crime No.90 of 2005 under Sections 4(1)(aaa) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 r/w Section 328 of IPC was registered against him on the file of Kondaalampatti Police Station of Salem district and an action in respect the same was dropped by an order dated 15.02.2007 in Diary No.358 of 2007 on the file of Judicial Magistrate - VI, Salem and that the petitioner has suppressed these details about the criminal case and hence the petitioner was not selected.

(3.) The petitioner had contended further that there was a criminal case against all the people in the village the petitioner belongs and a criminal case was registered under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 by the Superintendent of Police, Salem Rural District. The petitioner was working as a coolie and he was not aware about any incident and he was innocent and pleaded that the case may be dropped against him. He got bail and the police have not enquired him about the incident at all. Based on the verbal instructions given by the Inspector of Police that actions have been dropped against the petitioner and under the bonafide impression that the criminal case against the petitioner was dropped, the petitioner filled up the application for the post of Second Grade Constable by mentioning that no criminal case was pending against him. Based on the information given under the Right to Information Act, as mentioned supra, the petitioner came to know that the criminal case has been registered against him under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and he was not selected to the post of Second Grade Constable and he sent a representation dated 24.06.2009 requesting the details about the criminal case against him and the status of investigation. The 3rd Respondent has sent a reply to him on 13.07.2009 that nobody was affected due to the liquor allegedly possessed by the petitioner, the same was not sent for chemical examination and no report was received in that aspect. There are no details in the case diary to show that the petitioner or his neighbour or his father was enquired by the police regarding his presence and no certificate from Village Administrative Officer has been obtained regarding his absence in the village. Thirty cases filed against the villagers on the same day otherwise registered were closed as further action dropped.