IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 33279 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ VIPIN.S.S., ARAMAM, OLATHANNI, NEYYATTINKARA P.O., PIN-695 121. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE COMMANDANT, APB SAP BATTALION, SAP CAMP, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, PSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 33279 OF 2009 (D) ===================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner states that by Ext.P1, after due process of selection, he was advised by the PSC for appointment as Police Constable (APB). However, the 5th respondent has failed to issue appointment orders for the reason that the petitioner is accused No.17 in CC No.1292/06, pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, I, Neyyattinkara, in which he has been enlarged on bail. According to the petitioner, the training for his batch mates are to begin soon and that the pendency of the case should not stand in the way of the respondents appointing the petitioner and enabling him to undergo the training like the colleagues. Counsel also placed reliance on Ext.P5 judgment rendered by this court in WP(C) No.24323/07 and connected cases. 2. It is true that the petitioner is accused in the case noticed above. However this Court has been consistently taking the view that the pendency of a criminal case by itself will not render a person ineligible to be admitted for training or appointment and that the matter has to be dealt with in WPC 33279/09 :2 : accordance with Rule 10(b)(iii) of the KS & SSR as laid down in Ext.P5. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (1) That the respondents shall issue the order of appointment to the petitioner as Police Constable pursuant to Ext.P1 memo and send the petitioner for training along with his batch mates. (2) It is directed that thereafter it will be open to the respondents to deal with the case of the petitioner in terms of the directions contained in Ext.P5, the judgment in WP(C) No.24323/07 and connected cases. (3) Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 4th respondent, who shall pass appropriate orders in the matter. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp