Madras High Court
R.Arulraj vs The Chairman on 22 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 22.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
R.Arulraj ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board,
No.807, P.T.Lee Chengalvarraya Naicker Maligai,
Chennai - 2.
2. The Additional Director General of Police (Prison)
cum Inspector General of Prisons,
Office of the Additional Director General of Police,
Egmore, Chennai - 8.
3. The Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Tirunelveli City. ... Respondents/Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order of
this Court made in W.P(MD).No.1446 of 2019, dated 13.03.2019.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Malaikani
For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan,
Senior Government Counsel
for Mr.A.K.Manickam,
Government Counsel
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
We have heard Mr.S.Malaikani, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Senior Government Counsel,
assisted by Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned Government Counsel appearing for the
respondents.
2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 13.03.2019 in
W.P.(MD) No.1446 of 2021, filed by the appellant herein.
3. The appellant prayed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus to quash the order passed by the second respondent dated
14.12.2018 and consequently, direct the second respondent to appoint the
petitioner as Jail Warder Grade-II, within the stipulated time.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
4. The writ petition was clubbed along with the batch of cases and
dismissed by a common order dated 13.03.2019. After hearing the learned
counsel for the parties, we find that the factual matter in the case on hand is
quite different and distinct from the other cases, which were heard and
dismissed by the common impugned order. Therefore, we have further heard the
learned counsel for the parties.
5. By the order dated 14.12.2018, the second respondent found the
appellant not suitable to be selected to the said post, which is the uniformed
service, on the ground that the appellant has suppressed the registration of a
criminal case against him in Crime No. 663 of 2016, on the file of the Pettai
Police Station, Tirunelveli City, for the alleged offences punishable under
Sections 147, 294(b), 341, 323, 506(1) and Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Public
Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 and Section 4 of the Tamil
Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 2002.
6. The issue to be considered is whether the appellant had knowledge
of the criminal case and if he had the knowledge, is there any material to show
that the appellant had knowledge of the criminal case and that there was a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
deliberate suppression of the criminal case when the application was filed for
appointment to the said post pursuant to the notification for a recruitment,
which has been issued much after the registration of the FIR. What is the
important to note is that within three days of the registration of the FIR, the case
has been closed as Mistake of Fact. In the absence of any material to show that
the appellant had knowledge of registration of the FIR and therefore, there was
a deliberate suppression, even though the case was closed as Mistake of Fact, it
has to be taken as there was no suppression. This aspect of the matter appears to
have not been specifically brought out before the Writ Court, when the writ
petition was heard along with the batch of cases and ultimately dismissed.
7. Thus, we are satisfied that there is no intention on the part of the
appellant to suppress any criminal case much less pending of criminal case,
when the FIR itself was referred as Mistake of Fact within three days of
registration i.e., on 06.11.2016 itself. Apart from that, there is an instruction
from the Government that whenever complaint had been registered and referred
as Mistake of Fact and the matter has been closed, the benefit should be granted
to the applicant for recruitment to any Uniformed Services. Therefore, we are
satisfied that the order dated 14.12.2018, impugned in the writ petition is not
maintainable.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
8. For the above reasons, this writ appeal is allowed. Consequently,
the order dated 13.03.2019 in W.P(MD).No.1446 of 2019 is set aside and
consequently, the order passed by the second respondent dated 14.12.2018 is
quashed and the second respondent is directed to appoint the petitioner to the
post of Jail Warder Grade-II, in the Tamil Nadu Police service, within a period
of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs.
Index :Yes/No (T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
Internet :Yes/No 22.06.2021
pkn
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy
of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
To:
1. The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board,
No.807, P.T.Lee Chengalvarraya Naicker Maligai,
Chennai - 2.
2. The Additional Director General of Police (Prison)
cum Inspector General of Prisons,
Office of the Additional Director General of Police,
Egmore, Chennai - 8.
3. The Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Tirunelveli City.
W.A.(MD)No.1067 of 2021
22.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
