ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 11.01.2022 thereby rejecting the petitioner's candidature for the post of Gr.II. Police Constable for the year 2020.

2. The petitioner is qualified with B.Sc.,(Zoology) degree. The TamilNadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board had called for common recruitment 2020 for the posts of Grade II Police constable-TSP/Grade-II Police Constable-AR/Firemen/Jail Warder. The petitioner applied for the post of Gr.II Police constable-TSP on 05.10.2020. He wrote his written examination and also selected for physical endurance test. Thereafter, he was provisionally selected for the post of Gr.II Police Constable-TSP by the selection list dated 26.11.2021. At the time of verification of his antecedents, the third respondent issued order dated 11.01.2022 thereby rejected his candidature on the ground that he had suppressed his involvement in a criminal case, while responding to the notification issued by the Board.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR was registered as against the petitioner for the offences punishable under section 294(b) of IPC on 06.02.2019 on the allegation that during patrol of the Walajabad Police, the petitioner standing in front of a temple and used obscene words and despite warning to leave the place, the petitioner continued to commit the offence and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. After completion of investigation, concerned police authorities filed a final report and the same has been taken cognizance in S.T.C.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kanchipuram. Subsequently, the petitioner was acquitted by the judgment and decree dated 06.09.2021. For trivial allegations case was foisted as against the petitioner and as such the petitioner had no intention to suppress any of the criminal case pending as against him. It was neither willful nor wanton due to mistake and oversight only he failed to communicate about the registration of FIR. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs Abhij Singh Pawar reported in 2018 (18) SCC 733 wherein it was held in respect of determination of suppression and false information as follows:

''12. A three Judge Bench of this Court in Avtar Singh v. Union of India (supra) was required to consider the difference of opinion in decisions of this Court on the question of suppression of information or submission of false information in the verification form on issues pertaining to involvement in criminal cases and the effect thereof. The law on the point was settled by this Court in following terms in paragraph No.38 of its decision as under:

“38. We have noticed various decisions and tried to explain and reconcile them as far as possible. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we summarise our conclusion thus:

38.1. Information given to the employer by a candidate as to conviction, acquittal or arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information.

38.2. While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information.

38.3. The employer shall take into consideration the government orders/instructions/rules, applicable to the employee, at the time of taking the decision.

38.4. In case there is suppression or false information of involvement in a criminal case where conviction or acquittal had already been recorded before filling of the application/verification form and such fact later comes to knowledge of employer, any of the following recourses appropriate to the case may be adopted:

38.4.1. In a case trivial in nature in which conviction had been recorded, such as shouting