According to the learned Additional Advocate General, the latest Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Civil Appeal No.67 of 2018, dated 08.01.2018, Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration and Others Vs.13049 of 2019A2(1)/10/306/2018 dated 27.11.2018 and quash the same and to give appointment to the petitioner in Reg.The writ petitioner has completed the decree and participated in the selection process to the post of Grade-II Police in the year 2018 and has attended the physical test and written examination and also participated in the oral test.The petitioner was selected for the post of Grade-II Police, but the first respondent sent a letter in his proceedings No.C.NO.A2(1)/10/306/2018, dated 27.11.2018 informed thehttp://www.judis.nic.in 3 petitioner that he was not selected the post of Grade-II Police since the petitioner involved in a criminal case.In the aforesaid criminal case in C.C.No.148 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhungar, passed a Judgment by acquitting the petitioner from the aforesaid criminal case and now no criminal case is pending against the petitioner.But, the second respondent has rejected the application of the petitioner and passed the impugned order in C.NO.A2(1)/10/306/2018, dated 27.11.2018 without any justification and the said order is liable to be quashed.The Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents relied upon the following decisions of this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court.1. 2008 (2) MLJ 1203 (Full Bench) Manikandan Vs.Chairman, TNUSRB2. 2014(2) CTC 337 (Larger bench) Alex Ponseelan Vs.DGP, Chennai.2015(2)SCC 377 Joginder Singh Vs.Union Territory of Chadigarh.4. 2016(8) SCC 471(Larger bench of Supreme Court) in Avatar Singh and Others Vs.C.A. No.67 of 2018 – Union Territory of Chandigar Vs.Pradeep Kumar.6. 2018(6) CTC 659 – State of Madhya Pradesh and Others Vs.Abhijit Singh Pawar.http://www.judis.nic.in 14 “(3).In this connection, it is submitted that, at present, the above said candidate was involved in Pandalkudi P.S., Cr.P.C on 15.11.2014 at 04.00 hrs he was taken custody for Preventive Arrest and the same was action dropped by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Pandalkudi P.S. After completion of enquiry, he was released on the same day.(4).The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar East Police Station and the Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar Rural Police Station had stated in their reports, dated 13.06.2019 that no criminal case is registered against Tr.T. Iyyappadoss.The Inspectors of Police, Special Branch, Virudhunagar submitted a report, dated 16.06.2019 that Tr.Therefore, this Court has no hesitation to set aside the impugned order, dated 27.11.2018 in C.No.A22(1)/10/306/2018 and the matter is remanded back to the second respondent to consider the matter afresh.The 2nd respondent/Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar is directed to re-consider the appointment orderhttp://www.judis.nic.in 15 of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as early as possible, within a period of three (3) weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of the order.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.No Costs.Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.24.06.2019 ksa Index : Yes / No Internet: yes / No1.The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, No.807, P.T.Lee Chengaalvaraya Naicker Maaligai, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.The State of Tamilnadu, represented by its Inspector of Police, East Police Station, Virudhunagar.http://www.judis.nic.in 16 D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J., ksa WP(MD).No.

Cited provisions: Section 376 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 509 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 380 in The Indian Penal Code