IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32079 of 2010(H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- RIYAS A.P., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED A.P., ADUKKATH PARAMBATH HOUSE, PARANNUR, KOZHIKODE (DISTRICT), PIN 673585. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001. 2. THE CONVENOR, SPECIAL SELECTION BOARD, COMMANDO WING OF INDIAN RESERVE BATTALION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001. 4. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN 695004. ADV. MR. ALEXANDER THOMAS – SC FOR PSC. MR. ANTONY MUKKATH – GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.32079 OF 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has been advised for recruitment as Police Constable in the Commando Wing of Indian Reserve battalion 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 decision 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 other appropriate writs directing the 2nd respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the list of trainees and permit the petitioner to join the training camp. ii. To declare that the petitioner is entitled to join for training and consequential appointment, irrespective of pending criminal case and the 2nd respondent has no authority to prohibit the petitioner from attending the training. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. W.P.(c)No.32079/10 2 3. From the above said decision relied on by the petitioner, I find that a learned Judge of this Court has issued certain directions in a writ petition filed by an identically situated person. Accordingly, following that decision, this writ petition is disposed of as 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. 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. The petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the concerned Commandant for compliance. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.32079/10 3 W.P.(c)No.32079/10 4