Disposed

Raja v. the Chairman

Madras HC25 Oct 2021WP(MD)/11517/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition seeking quashing of an order rejecting the petitioner's candidature for Grade-II posts due to non-disclosure of pending criminal cases. The court held that the petitioner retains the right to apply for future vacancies once the impediment is cleared and dismissed the petition with liberty to apply in the future.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty granted to petitioner to apply for future notifications once the legal impediment regarding pending criminal cases is resolved.

Raja Vs the Chairman — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

WP(MD) No.11517 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.10.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

WP(MD) No.11517 of 2021 and WMP(MD).No.9037 of 2021

Raja

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Chairman,

Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶11

The Director General of Police, O/o. the Director General of Police, Chennai – 4.

¶12

3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶13

4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Alanganallur Police Station, Madurai District.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to call for the records pertaining to issue a Writ of Certioraified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in RC.No.4339/2020-1, dated 23.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.3 and quash the same as illegal and for consequential direction, directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner (Registration No.2402603) as Grade – II Constable, Grade II Jail Warders and Fireman in the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board 2019 forthwith.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.R. Venkatesan

¶17

For Respondents : Mr. Veerakathiravan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr. A.K. Manikkam Standing Counsel for State

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order, dated 23.06.2021 passed in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ R.C.No.4339/2020-1, by the 3^rd respondent and quash the same and

¶20

1/3

¶21

WP(MD) No.11517 of 2021

¶22

consequently, direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner (Registration No.2402603) as Grade – II Constable, Grade II Jail Warders and Fireman in the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board 2019 forthwith.

¶23

Heard Mr. R. Venkatesan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Veerakathirvan, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. A.K. Manikkam, learned counsel appearing for respondents.

¶24

The Petitioner has applied for the post of Grade – II Constable, Grade-II Jail Warders and Fireman in the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board 2019 called for by the respondents and submitted the application in Registration No.2402603. The petitioner appeared for the written examination and was successfully passed on the same. The respondents called the petitioner to appear for the Medical examination and in the Medical Examination also, he was provisionally selected and subsequently, during the police verification, it was found that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.51 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 143,188,341 of IPC and Crime No. 70 of 2017 for the offence under Section 151 CPC, and the same were pending at the time of submitting the application by the petitioner. However, the said fact was not disclosed in the application and hence, the petitioner's application was rejected.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that earlier the petitioner has filed Writ Petition in WP (MD).No.8264 of 2020 before this Court and this Court vide order dated 09.04.2021 directed the 3^rd respondent to re-scrutinize the petitioner's candidatures, in the light of the observations made in the said Writ Petition and and pass fresh orders within a period of six weeks. Again, the respondents have rejected the said claim of the petitioner and hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition before this Court.

¶26

According to the petitioner, the present application has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has not disclosed the material facts relating to the aforesaid criminal case in Crime No.51 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 143,188,341 of IPC and Crime No. 70 of 2017 for the offence under Section 151 CPC. In view of the rejection order, the petitioner has a legal impediment to apply if any fresh notification issued by the 4^th respondent. Therefore, the petitioner seeks liberty to make an application when the next fresh notification called for by the respondents.

¶27

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that if any fresh notification called for selection for future, it is open to the petitioner to apply and the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ same shall be considered by the respondents on merits and in

¶28

2/3

¶29

WP(MD) No.11517 of 2021

¶30

accordance with law.

¶31

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above liberty. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶32

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶33

// True Copy //

¶34

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

trp

1.The Chairman,

Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶39

The Director General of Police, O/o. the Director General of Police, Chennai – 4.

¶40

3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶41

4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Alanganallur Police Station, Madurai District.

¶42

+1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-32557[F] dated 26/10/2021 )

¶43

WP(MD) No.11517 of 2021 and WMP(MD).No.9037 of 2021 25.10.2021

¶44

TR/JGB(15.11.2021) 3P 6C

¶45

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶46

3/3

Raja v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Chellavel, Vs M.A. Murugesan

P.M. Raju, Vs Murugesan

M.Thavamani, Vs Murugesan

Ajithkumar Vs the Chairman

Santhoshkumar.J Vs the Director General of Police

V.Kalyani Vs the Secretary to Government