GUGULOTHU NAGU Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner applied for the post of Police Constable under ST category in 13th Battalion, TSSP (IR) in the police department, pursuant to notification dated 31.12.2015. The petitioner qualified in the preliminary written examination in April 2016 and later, he appeared in the main examination in the month of October 2016. After qualifying in the main examination, the petitioner was subjected to physical efficiency test by the respondent No.3. The petitioner qualified in the physical efficiency test and was selected provisionally.

(2.) While so, a show cause notice dated 06.04.2017 was issued against the petitioner alleging that during verification of the antecedents, it was found that a criminal case was pending trial in Cr.No.250 of 2012 under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC on the file of the Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad. It is stated by the petitioner that the in-charge of the Regional Enforcement Squad of APSRTC gave a false complaint against the petitioner and another person on 08.08.2012 alleging that a complaint was received from the verification in-charge of the bus stop centre at Dilsukhnagar stating that bogus application for student concession bus pass was given by him and another person by submitting forged signatures of the Principal of Nova Engineering College in order to get concessional bus pass. After investigation, charge sheet was filed in C.C.No.802 of 2012 on the file of the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses and marked Exs.P1 to P16 besides M.Os.1 and 2. Having considered the evidence on record, the petitioner was acquitted holding that the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not disclose or establish the essential ingredients of Section 420 IPC and further the documents do not disclose that they were forged and the documents seized from the petitioner are not proved and thereby the prosecution failed to prove their case.

(3.) Petitioner submitted reply to the show cause vide explanation dated 17.04.2017 stating that he had disclosed about the pendency of the said crime in his application at relevant column No.1 and did not suppress any information. It is contended that without considering the fact that the petitioner was acquitted in the said case, the respondents have issued proceedings dated 03.07.2017 canceling his provisional selection on the ground that the petitioner was involved in criminal case. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed WP.No.25473 of 2017, which was disposed of by order dated 01.08.2017 directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the application of the petitioner dated 23.06.2017. Pursuant to the said order, the impugned memo dated 02.11.2017 was issued rejecting the case of the petitioner for the following reasons: