1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.A.(MD)No.96 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2011 M.Rajapandi ..Appellant Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 012. 2.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Chennai 600 004. ... Respondents Prayer: Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 18.11.2010 in W.P.(MD)No.3588 of 2010 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the memorandum Pa.Mu.Ka.No.22733/Niyamanam/(2) 2009-41, dt. 18.02.2010 issued by the respondent to appoint the petitioner to the post of Police Constable Grade II. For Appellant : Mr.N.S.Ponnaiah For Respondents : Mr.R.Janakiramulu, Special Government Pleader JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR,J.) This Writ appeal is filed against the order made in W.P.(MD) No.3588 of 2010 dated 18.11.2010 wherein the appellant has challenged the order of the respondent dated 18.02.2010 stating that the appellant has not disclosed of his involvement in the criminal case and as per Rule 14(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, the appellant is not entitled to be appointed for the post of Grade-II Police Constable. 2.The learned Single Judge noticing the fact about the filling up of the application form by the appellant particularly Column No.15, wherein it is stated that the petitioner has not involved in any criminal case, upheld the order of the respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 The learned Single Judge also relied upon a decision of the Full Bench Judgment reported in 2008(2) CTC 97 (Manikandan Vs. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services) as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2008(1) SCC 660 (Radhakrishnan V. Director General of Police). 3.Even though the fact about the involvement of the criminal case is mentioned in Column No.16, the Column No.15 having been filled up with wrong information, the order passed by the respondent cannot be found fault with. A copy of the application signed by the appellant dated 29.12.2008 is also produced before us. We have also perused Column Nos.15 and 16 and we are unable to see any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 012. 2.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Chennai 600 004. +1cc to Mr.N.S.Ponniah, Advocate Sr.No.5419 +1cc to The Special Government Pleader, Sr.No.5419 nbj akm/8.3.11 /2p-5c/ W.A.(MD)No.96 of 2011 10.02.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/