Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : B.SUDERSHAN REDDY, GHULAM MOHAMMED
A.Sagar - Appellant
Versus
State Level Police Recruitment Board, Hyderabad - Respondent
W.P.No.18929/02
Decided On : 10-11-02
Advocates Appeared :
Mr.A.Giridhar Rao
( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government pleader for Services-I and at their request, the matter is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.
( 2 ) RULE Nisi.
( 3 ) THE petitioner herein invokes theextraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of india challenging the legality of the order dated 2-8-2002 made in O. A. No. 3320 of 2002 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative tribunal whereunder the Tribunal refused to grant any relief whatsoever to the petitioner herein. The said Original application is filed by the petitioner herein challenging the action of the third respondent herein in not permitting him to attend basic training of Police Constable as arbitrary and illegal.
( 4 ) BEFORE adverting to the question as towhether the petitioner is entitled for any relief in this Writ Petition, it may be necessary to briefly notice the relevant facts leading to filing of this writ petition.
( 5 ) THE first respondent herein issued anotification in newspapers in July, 2001 calling for applications from the eligible candidates for recruitment to the post of police Constables. The petitioner herein is one of the applicants. He belongs to mahabubnagar District in the State of andhra Pradesh. The petitioner also possesses the requisite educational qualification. He fulfils all the requisite conditions for making an application for the selection and appointment to the post of police Constable. The petitioner submitted his preference for the post of Police constable, A. P. Special Police.
( 6 ) THERE is no dispute whatsoever that the petitioner had passed in all the physical efficiency tests conducted by the respondents.
( 7 ) THE second respondent- superintendent of Police, Mahabubnagar district vide his proceedings dated 25-2-2002 directed the petitioner herein to report before the Reserve Inspector of Police, d. A. R. , Mahabubnagar on 7-3-2002 for sending him for medical test to be conducted by the Superintendent, headquarters Hospital, Mahabubnagar. The petitioner accordingly appeared for the medical test and was found fit medically for recruitment to the post of Police Constable. Thereafter, the second respondent directed the petitioner to report before him on 21-3-2002 for sending him to basic training in A. P. Special Police Battalion. The petitioner accordingly appeared before the second respondent along with all the original certificates and also an amount of rs. 2,000/- which is required to be deposited as advance towards mess charges. The second respondent upon verification of all the certificates, by the proceedings dated 21-3-2002 directed the petitioner herein to report before the third respondent to undergo basic training.
( 8 ) THE third respondent did not allow the petitioner for the basic training commenced from 23-3-2002 without assigning any reason. The fact remains that there is no order even as on to-day passed by the third respondent informing the petitioner as to why he has not been permitted to undergo training though he is deputed by the second respondent herein for such training.
( 9 ) IT is under those circumstances, the petitioner filed O. A. No. 3320 of 2002 challenging the action of the third respondent herein as illegal and arbitrary. The Tribunal having admitted the Original application granted appropriate interim order directing the third respondent herein to permit the petitioner to undergo the training. However, the Tribunal by its order- dated 2-8-2002 dismissed the Original application filed by the petitioner herein following its earlier judgment dated 16-3-1995 made in O. A. No. 4491 of 1994. That is how the petitioner invokes the jurisdiction of this Court questioning the correctness of the order passed by the tribunal.
( 10 ) THE third respondent herein filed a detailed counter-affidavit both in the tribunal as well as in this Court. It is the case of the third respondent that the petitioner wa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.