VIRENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.02.2009 (Annexure P/1) whereby the entire selection except for the post of Constable (Trade -men) is cancelled by the respondents.

(2.) SHRI Rajendra Bhargava, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that eligible candidates appeared in selection process for the post of Constable (GD). The said selection is erroneously cancelled by the impugned order. It is submitted that as per GOP 78/97 dated 02.04.1997 (Annexure P/3) the general directions were issued. As per clause 5 of GOP, the selection process is supervised by senior police officers. As per clause 11(6), the selection can be cancelled only in certain circumstances. In the present case, selection is mechanically cancelled. He further submits that as per PHQ letter dated 24.05.2006 the local police units were permitted to impart education by way of coaching to the wards of police personnels. Accordingly, certain candidates obtained coaching and there is no illegality in the same. Respondents have acted contrary to the judgment of Supreme Court reported in : 2010 (10) SCC 707 (Girjesh Shrivastava and Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.).

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.