WP/24368/2020 of Ganaveni Thirupathi Vs The State of Telangana on 31 December 2020

ORDER

This writ petidon is being disposed of at the admissionstage with the consent of both pafties.stage with the consent of both pafties.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

"to [issue ]any Writ, order or direction mote especially one in thenature of [!$7rit ]of Mandamus declaring the Impugned Memorandumin Rc.No.222lRectt /Gen.t/2079, Dt t7 /08/2020 of the 2^,rrespondent whereby cancelling the provisional Selection of thePetitioner vide Reg No.1216936 to the posr of SCTpC TSSp pursuantto the Recruitment Notification l,ith Rc.No.gg/R ect./ A<lmn.7/ 20lgDt 3l/05/2078 as illegal, arbitrarv un-constitutional and violation ofArticles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently bysetting aside the Impugncd Memoran<lum of the 2.d respondcrrtDt 77 /08/2020 direct the r€spondents to forthrvith consider andappoint the pctitioner to the post of SCTpC (TSSIT) pursuant to hisProvisional Selection and to pass such other order or ordcrs as rhisHon'ble Court mav deems fit iust ancl proper in the circumstances ofthe case."

3Heard Sri C.Hari preeth, learned counsel appearing forthe petitioner and the learned Special Government preaderappearing for the respondents.the petitioner and the learned Special Government preaderappearing for the respondents.

4. It has been contended by the petirioner that he is fulyeligible and qualified to be appointed for the post of policeConstable. While so, the respondents have issued a recruitmentNotification on 31.05.2018 and pursuant to the said Notification, hehas responded to the same and after undergoing regular selectionprocess, he was selected for the post of Stipendiary Cadet TraineePolice Constable in Telangana State Special police (herein after

referred to as [('TSSP") ]on 24.09.20t9. In the process of selection,he has to fill up one attestation form informing as to whether anycriminal case is pending against him and he has hlled the saidattestation form making it very clear that no criminal case ispending against him.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contendedthat earlier the criminal proceedings were initiated against thepetitioner in S.C.No.128 of 2016 and the competent criminal Courtacquitted the petitioner on 08.04.2019 itself and, therefore, as onthe date of filling up of attestation form, no criminal case ispending against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has notdisclosed about the said criminal case wherein the petitionet wasacquitted. Be that as it may, the respondents have issued a Show-cause Notice on 25.02.2020 asking him as to why the provisionalselection of the petitioner should not be cancelled on the ground ofsuppression of pendency of criminal case against him. pursuantto the said Show-cause Notice, the petitioner has submitted adetailed explanation on 07.03.2020 making it very clear that as onthe date of submission of attestation form, no criminal case ispending against him and requested the respondents not to takeany action against him pursuant to the Show-cause Notice dated25.02.2020. But, the respondents, without considering theexplanation submitted by the petitioner have cancelled theprovisional selection of the petitioner vide proceedings dated77.08,2020. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is file d.

6. Learned [counsel appearing ][for ][the ][petitioner ][futther]contended that [the ][petitioner ][has ][not ][suppressed ][anything, ][as]admittedly, [no ][criminal ][case ][is ][pending ][against ][him ][as ][on ][the date]of frlling [up of ][attestation ][form' ][The ][petitioner ][has ][not ][disclosed]about criminal [case ][registered ][against ][him. ][Therefore, appropriate]ordets be [passed ][in ][the ][writ ]Petidon [directing ][the ][respondents ][to]re-consider [the ][case ][of ][the ][petitionet for ][appointment ][to ][the ][post]of Stipendiary [Cadet ][Trainee ][Police ][Constable (TSSP)']

?. Learned [Counsel ][for the ][petitioner further ][contended that]in Avtar Singh [v. ][Union ][of ][India ][and othersl, ][the ][Flon'ble ][Supreme]Court had elaborately [considered an ][identical ][issue ][wherein ][the]Hon'ble Supreme [Court ][at ][pata ]['38' ][gave certain ][elaborate]clirections [as ][to how the authorities ][have ][to ][deal ][with ][fespect ][to ][the]of [facts ][in ][respect ][of ][minot ][criminal ][cases ][and]suppression whether there [is ][a ][chatge of moral ][turpitude ][or ][not? ][In ][view of ][the]framed [by ][the ][Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court ][in ][the ][above ][said]guidelines case, let the case [of the ][petitioner ][also ][be considered ][in ][accordance]with the [judgment ][of ][Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court ][in ][Avtar ][Singh's ][case](1 supra). He [further ][contended ][that ][in ][Avtar ][Singh ][v' ][Union ][of]India and others [2 ]^t [pua ][(4' ][of ][the ][iudgment, ][the ][Hon'ble]Court [has ][reiterated the very ][same ][issue ][in ][Avtar ][Singh's]Supreme case (1 supra). [Therefore, approptiate ][orders be ][passed ][in ][the ][writ]petition directing [the ][respondents ][to ][re-consider ][the ][case ][of ][the]

, (2016) 8 SCC 471

, (2016) 8 SCC 471

' [Civil ][{ppeal No.lR-48 ol ][20l?dt.l5-11-201-](arising fiom SLP [(C) ]No.20525 [of20l ][I ][dt'21-07-2016)](arising fiom SLP [(C) ]No.20525 [of20l ][I ][dt'21-07-2016)]

petitioner afresh in terms of the law laid down by the Hon,bleSupreme Court in above said cases and pass appropdate orders inaccordance with law.

8. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for therespondents has contended that the information sought from everyselected candidate in the attestation form asking whether anycriminal case is pending against the petitioner, at arry point oftime, it does not mean that it amounts to pendency of any criminalcase only at the time of frlling up of attestation form and thepetitioner was not asked to give the status of pendency of criminalcase as on the date of filling up of attestation form. Therefore, thepetitioner has, admittedly, suppressed about pendency of acriminal case against him and the same amounts to supptession offacts. Therefore, the respondents have rightly reiected the case ofthe petitioner. Hence, there are no merits in the writ petition andthe same is liable to be dismissed.

9. This Court, having considered the rival submissionsmade by the learned counsel for the parties, is of the consideredview that the respondents have cancelled the provisional selectionof the petitioner without following the guidelines issued by theHon'ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh's case (1 supra) and AvtarSingh's case (2 supra). Therefore, ends of justice would be met ifthe respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitionerin tenns of thc guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in To, the above two referred cases and the impugned order is riabre to beset aside and accordingly it is set aside. The respondents aredirected to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of the lawlaid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh,s caseset aside and accordingly it is set aside. The respondents aredirected to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of the lawlaid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh,s case(1 supra) and Avtar Singh,s case (2 supra) in respect ofsuppressionof facts and also in view of acquittal of the petitioner bv theof facts and also in view of acquittal of the petitioner bv thecompetent criminal Court and pass appropriate orders inaccordance with law within a reasonable period of time, preferablyrvithin a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copv ofthis order.accordance with law within a reasonable period of time, preferablyrvithin a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copv ofthis order.

10. With the above directions, the writ petition is allowed.No order as to costs.No order as to costs.

11. Pending miscellaneouspetitions, if any, shall standclosed.//rRUE copy t t'",-" [itti!?fitfftBirsrfii8]SECTIbN OFFICERclosed.//rRUE copy t t'",-" [itti!?fitfftBirsrfii8]SECTIbN OFFICER

' IlSJr:!:ff, [Secretary, Home Department, ]State of rerangana, secretariat,, Ii*"rPiS:gliiild"JiigrJ: [Stare Lever, ][porice ]Recruitment Board (rsLpRB),Ii*"rPiS:gliiild"JiigrJ: [Stare Lever, ][porice ]Recruitment Board (rsLpRB),4. 3. One Twoccs CC to Sri. C. Hari Flopucls. Two c.D. to Gp ror ro;'""tn'Advocate e' High court for the State of relangana. [oUTJcopies s. Two c.D. to Gp ror ro;'""tn'Advocate e' High court for the State of relangana. [oUTJcopies Prk\[.j--]

HIGH [COURT]

DATED:31 [11212020]

ORDERWP.No.24368 [of ][2020]

Atlowing the [WP.]without costs.

2. \

ItlSTAed [11JAil2o2l]c)t*-Cr'.i