IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33216 of 2010(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SAYYADALI KHAN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. SHARAFUDEEN, SAFEER MANZIL, PERUMALA, MOOZHI, MANIKKAL MURI, PALLAMPARA VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM), SMT.ASHA CHACKO. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. COMMANDANT S.P., SAP COMMANDANT OFFICE, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 33216 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 2nd day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner has been advised for recruitment as Police Constable by the Public Service Commission. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is not being deputed for training on the ground that a criminal case is pending against him. According to the petitioner, such stand is against the decisions of this Court in Christopher Jose v. State of Kerala [(1999) (3) KLT 285] and other similar cases. The petitioner also submits that relying on those judgments, similar cases have been disposed of. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to join the training and duty in pursuance of Ext. P1 advice memo and Ext. P2 appointment order without any delay.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I find that relying on the above said decision relied on by the petitioner, a learned Judge of this Court has issued certain directions in a writ petition filed by an identically situated person. But the training has already started on 11.10.2010. The learned Government Pleader admits that the Commandant has authority to grant leave of absence upto 45 days for valid reasons. Accordingly, following that decision, this writ petition is disposed of as W.P.C. No. 33216/2010 -: 2 :- follows: The respondents shall permit the petitioner to attend the ensuing training after following the procedures prescribed thereof and other rules relating to the same. For this purpose the Commandant shall consider whether the petitioner can be granted leave of absence exercising authority vested with him. It is clarified that if the petitioner is finally found ineligible based on the judgment of the criminal court to enter or continue in Government service as Police Constable, the respondents will be free to take appropriate action including recovery of the entire expenses incurred by the Government for providing training to the petitioner. It is also directed that the petitioner shall execute a bond undertaking that he shall refund the entire amount incurred by the Government for the purpose of his training. On execution of such bond, along with others the petitioner shall also be permitted to attend the training subject to the Commandant granting leave of absence for the period from 11.10.2010 till date of joining. The petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the concerned Commandant for compliance. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.