Madras High Court
K.Mareeswaran vs The Director General Of Police on 26 August, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A(MD)No.2168 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
W.A(MD)No.2168 of 2024
K.Mareeswaran ... Appellant
vs.
1.The Director General of Police,
Tamil Nadu Police Department,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
2.Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board,
Represented by its Member Secretary,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus,
Pantheon Road,
Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar. ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
W.A(MD)No.2168 of 2024
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order dated 21.04.2023 made in W.P(MD)No.7225 of 2023 on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu
For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by
Mr.M.Sarangan
Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
This intra-court appeal has been instituted to assail the writ order
dated 21.04.2023 passed in W.P(MD)No.7225 of 2023.
2.The appellant participated in the process of selection for
recruitment to the post of Grade-II Police Constable for the year 2020. He
was successful in the written examination and participated in the physical
verification test. During the police verification, it was found that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
appellant had been involved in two criminal cases registered at Soolakarai
Police Station. (i) Crime No.171 of 2014 under Sections 147, 148, 294(b),
323 and 506(ii) of IPC, in which he was arrayed as A.2. The case ended with
an order of acquittal under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C by the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar in C.C.No.212 of 2014 dated 26.02.2015.
(ii) Crime No.51 of 2019 under Section 435 of IPC, which was referred to as
undetected. Consequently, the appellant was not selected and a rejection
order was passed by the Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District,
vide proceedings dated 09.03.2023 which came to be challenged in the writ
proceedings. The writ Court dismissed the Writ Petition.
3.The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the
respondents submitted that as per the Rules, a person, who is acquitted or
discharged on benefit of doubt or due to the fact that the complainant turned
hostile, shall be treated as a person involved in a criminal case. Therefore,
the non-selection of the appellant is in consonance with the Rules and the
Writ Appeal is liable to be rejected.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
4.This Court is of the considered view that selection, per se,
cannot be claimed as an absolute right. Selection to Uniformed Services are
to be made by strictly following the procedures as contemplated. Verification
of antecedents and character is of paramount importance in the selection and
appointment process for Uniformed Services. The decision of the Selection
Committee regarding the antecedents became final and the Court is not
expected to substitute the views of the Selection Committee in such matters
relating to character and antecedent of a person for selection to the post of
police constable.
5.Mere acquittal would not provide a ground to seek selection
and appointment. When selection, per se, is not a right and verification of
character and antecedents is to be made by the competent authorities, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the dismissal of the Writ Petition by
the writ Court is in consonance with the established principles.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
6.Rule 14(b)(ii) and (iv) of the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu
Special Police Subordinate Services, Explanation (i) stipulates that “a person
who is acquitted or discharged on benefit of doubt or due to the fact that the
complainant turned hostile shall be treated as a person involved in a criminal
case”.
7.In the present case, the appellant was acquitted under Section
248(1) of Cr.P.C and therefore the facts of the appellant falls squarely within
the ambit of the above Rule.
8.Even in respect of acquittal, in other circumstances, the same
will not provide any right to seek selection and appointment. It is for the
competent Selection Committee to assess the character and antecedents of
the candidates. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
scope of interference in exercise of powers of judicial review in selection
matters relating to Uniformed Services are limited. This Court finds no
infirmity in respect of the writ order passed in the Writ Petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
9.Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no
order as to costs.
[S.M.S.,J.] & [G.A.M.,J.]
26.08.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
ps
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
To
1.The Director General of Police,
Tamil Nadu Police Department,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
2.The Member Secretary,
Represented by its Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus,
Pantheon Road,
Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
ps
ORDER MADE IN
DATED : 26.08.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 11:52:49 am )
