IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 W.P(C).No. 34377 of 2007(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- MAHESH, MAHESH NIVAS, KALAVOOR P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRIR.AZAD BABU RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CITY POLICE OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 34377 OF 2007 P = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 30th November, 2007 J U D G M E N T Petitioner has been selected for appointment as Police Driver in the Police Department in Kozhikode District and Ext. P1 is the communication issued in this behalf. The complaint of the petitioner is that he is not permitted to join in pursuance to Ext. P1 for the reason that he is an accused in C.C. No. 925 of 2007 which is pending trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Alappuzha. 2. Ext.P2 is the F.I.R in Crime No. 892 of 2007 based on which charge has been laid against the petitioner in C.C. No. 925 of 2007. Ext. P3 charge sheet shows that the petitioner is prosecuted for offences under Sections 323, 324 and 34 I.P.C. 3. The question is whether for the only reason that he is facing trial in a criminal case the petitioner should be denied the opportunity to join for training in pursuance to Ext. P1. This issue has been W.P.(C) No. 34377 OF 2007 -2- considered in several cases and Sebastian v. State of Kerala {2004 (2) KLT 1150} is identical on facts where relief has been granted. This judgment has been followed in W.P.(C) No. 34109/07 by a learned Single Judge of this Court and in that case also taking the view that for the only reason that a person is facing trial he is not ineligible for undergoing training, relief was granted. Therefore, following the aforesaid judgments, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner. 4. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the petitioner shall be permitted to attend the ensuing training following the procedure prescribed therefor. However, it is clarified that if the petitioner is later on found to be ineligible to be entered into Government service, the respondents will be entitled to take such action which they deem appropriate. It will be a further requirement that the petitioner should execute a bond agreeing that the respondents will also have the right to recover the entire expenses incurred for providing training to him, should an occasion arise requiring his removal from W.P.(C) No. 34377 OF 2007 -3- service. Subject to the aforesaid conditions it is directed that the petitioner shall be admitted to training in pursuance to Ext. P1. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-