W.P.(MD) No.3987 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 04.03.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.(MD) No.3987 of 2022

R.Sujin

... Petitioner

-vs-

Superintendent of Police,

District Police Office,

Nagercoil,

Kanyakumari District.

... Respondent

Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to

call for the records pertaining the impugned order in

Na.Ka.No.A4/9603/2021 dated 04.01.2022 on the file of the Respondent

and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the

respondent to appoint the petitioner in any one of the posts in the

cadre of Grade II Police Constable within the time stipulated by

this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Louis

For Respondent :

Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar,

Additional Government Pleader.

******

O R D E R

The order of rejection dated 04.01.2022, rejecting the

candidature of the petitioner for selection to the post of Grade II

Police Constable is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2.The petitioner, pursuant to the Recruitment Notification

issued by the respondent, participated in the process of selection.

He was successful in the written examination and allowed to

participate in the physical verification test and endurance test.

At the time of verification of certificates, the Selection Committee

rejected the case of the writ petitioner on the ground that two

criminal cases were registered against the petitioner and they were

quashed by this Court on account of the compromise entered between

the defacto complainant and the accused person.

1/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD) No.3987 of 2022

3.This Court is of the considered opinion that assessment of

a candidate with reference to antecedents, suitability and

eligibility is the power conferred on the Selection Committee. Such

an assessment cannot be interfered with the High Courts in a routine

manner unless, the selection is tainted with mala fides, fraud or

corrupt activities. The decision of the Selection Committee became

final regarding the assessment of merits, verification of

antecedents and ascertaining the suitability and eligibility of the

candidates. High Court is not an expert body to assess the

suitability and eligibility. Therefore, mere quashing of the

criminal charges would not be sufficient enough to form an opinion

that a candidate is suitable and eligible for uniformed services.

However, it is for the authorities to form an opinion regarding the

antecedents.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission

that the allegations in the criminal cases are petty in nature and

there was a compromise and they were quashed. Therefore,

registration of criminal case would not be a bar for selection. It

is contended that the criminal cases were registered at the age of

19 years and therefore, the criminal cases cannot be considered as a

bar for selection to the post of Grade II Police Constable.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of

Police and Others vs. Sandeep Kumar [C.A.No.1430 of 2007 dated

17.03.2021]. The relevant paragraph is as follows:-

“When the incident happened the respondent must

have been about 20 years of age. At that age young

people often commit indiscretions, and such

indiscretions can often been condoned. After all,

youth will be youth. They are not expected to behave

in as mature a manner as older people. Hence, our

approach should be to condone minor indiscretions made

by young people rather than to brand them as criminals

for the rest of their lives.”

6.This Court is of the considered opinion that it is an

observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. However,

such observations cannot be a bar for the Selection Committee to

assess the