IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.3 5 399 of 2025 and WMP.Nos.39624 & 39628 of 2025 G.Balamurugan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.THE MEMBER SECRETARY, TAMIL NADU UNIFORMED SERVICES RECRUITMENT BOARD , CHENNAI 600 008

2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DR. RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI, CHENNAI 600 004

3.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CUDDALORE DISTRICT, CUDDALORE ... Respondents PRAYER:

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus call for the records of the 3rd respondent order dated 22.04.2024 vide his proceeding in C.No. A4/ 14450/ TSP/ 2019 and to quash the same and also direct the respondents 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner in the post of Grade-II Police Constables, Grade-II Jail Warders and Firemen for the year 2025, Common Recruitment 2025 under the Reservation of 15 % under the Schedule Caste Category For Petitioner : M/s.Archana Sampath For Respondents For R1 : Mrs.D.Sowmi Dattan, Standing Counsel For R2 & 3 : Mr.P.Kumaresan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan, Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated

22.04.2024 on the file of the third respondent thereby rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Grade II Police Constable.

2. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community. He is qualified with BA English Literature. The first respondent issued notification for recruitment to the post of Grade II Police Constable on 06.03.2019. The petitioner applied for the same and he was provisionally selected for the said post. When the petitioner was waiting for appointment order, the third respondent by the proceedings dated 09.03.2020 stated that the petitioner was found that his conduct was not satisfied since the petitioner has involved in a criminal case registered in crime No.139 of 2014 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Killai Police Station, Cuddalore District. It was challenged before this court in WP.No.7009 of 2020. This court, by order dated 16.08.2023, quashed the impugned order and the third respondent was directed to consider the petitioner’s candidature afresh in the light of the law laid down in the batch of writ appeals in WP.MD.No.398 of 2020 dated 05.06.2023 within a period of six months. However the said request has once again been rejected by the order impugned in this writ petition.

3. Admittedly the petitioner was an accused in Cr.No.139 of

2014 registered for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 352, 341, 506(i) of IPC, which culminated into trial in CC.No.400 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-I, Chidambaram. However it ended in acquittal on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond any doubt by order dated 02.08.2018. The notification was issued for recruitment to the post of Grade II Police Constable on 06.03.2019. However the petitioner failed to mention the involvement in the criminal case since he was acquitted from the criminal case. On certificate verification, his candidature was rejected on the ground that his conduct and character are not satisfactory.

4. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the first respondent also relied upon Rule 14(2) in sub-rule (b)(iv) and Explanation (1) & (2) of Tamilnadu Special Police Subordinate Rules. Explanation (1) says that a person who is acquitted or discharged on benefit of doubt or due to the fact the complainant ‘turned hostile’ shall be treated as person involved in a criminal case. Further Explanation (2) says a person involved in a criminal case at the time of police verification and the case yet to be disposed of and subsequently ended in honourable acquittal or treated as mistake of fact shall be treated as not involved in a criminal case and he can claim right for appointment only by participating in the next recruitment.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of I