IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 28118 of 2005 Between: 1 The State Level Police Recruitment Board, rep by Chairman, Hyderabad 2 The IG of Police, Hyderabad 3 Superintendent of Police, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND B. Satyanarayana S/o B. Sambaiah r/o Palivelpula Mandal, Hanamkonda, Warangal District .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropritae Writ or direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records connected with order dated 18-07-2005 passed in O.A. No. 107/2005 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and quash the same as illegal and erroneous and pass such orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper inthe circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.V.V.N.NARASIMHAM The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.28118 OF 2005 ORDER (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed): This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 18-07-2005, passed in O.A.No.107 of 2005, on the file of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad 2. The petitioners assert that the respondent herein appeared for the selection of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable, Civil (Men) with Regd. No.3144409, in response to the notification issued on 28-01-2004. In the application Proforma submitted by the respondent, he stated that he was not involved in the criminal cases or arrested by the police. The respondent studied SSC and he belongs to BC-D category. He appeared for Physical Efficiency Test on 31-05-2004 and written test on 13-06-2004. He has qualified and was enlisted in the provisional selection list of SCT PCs, Civil. In accordance with the said list, he was directed to submit his original certificates and attestation forms, sent to him in duplicate, vide memo dated 03-09-2004. The respondent submitted original certificate and attestation forms on 03-09-2004. During the verification of antecedents, it is clearly stated in the Inspector of Special Bureau Investigation Report, dated 21-09-2004, that he was involved in the criminal case in Cr.No.68 of 2004 under Sections 307 read with Section 34 IPC, which was ended in acquittal vide judgment in S.C.No.467 of 2004, dated 23-09-2004. 3. The petitioners further assert that the matter was reported to the Chairman, SLPRB, AP, Hyderabad, vide office fax dated 27-09-2004, who in-turn, has issued instructions to cancel the provisional selection of the respondent, for suppression of factual information in the attestation forms, vide A/M.RC.No.1244/R&T/Genl.2/2003, dated 02-10-2004. In compliance with the instructions issued, the provisional candidature of the respondent was cancelled vide D.O.No.24 of 2005, dated 05-01-2005. Aggrieved by the action of the Superintendent of Police, Warangal, the respondent filed O.A.No.107 of 2005 before the Tribunal against the writ petitioners, praying for a direction to consider his case for appointment as Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable, Civil. 4. The Tribunal while disposing of the application by setting aside the cancellation order of selection of SCT PC directed the writ petitioners to reinstate the respondent into service. 5. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I 6. The Tribunal following the judgment of the Supreme Court in KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN AND OTHERS v. RAM RATAN YADAV[1], allowed the O.A. holding that the non-furnishing of information about the acquittal of the respondent in criminal cases by inadvertence does not amount to suppression of material information, as the applicant has already been acquitted of the criminal charges even prior to the Notification and set aside the order dated 05-01-2005. 7. The learned Government Pleader for Services-I contended that the respondent has suppressed the factual information while filling up his application form in response to the Notification dated 28-01-2004. 8. We have carefully gone through the material on record. Though the respondent has not stated about his involvement in the criminal case in the proforma application, however, in the attestation form, he has disclosed that he was involved in the criminal case and the same has ended in acquittal vide judgment in S.C.No.467 of 2004, dated 23-09-2004. In our considered opinion, the Tribunal, taking into account the above factual position and following the decision of the Supreme Court in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan’s case, has rightly set aside the impugned order of cancellation canceling the provisional candidature of the respondent for the post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable, Civil. 9. In the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal as it does not warrant any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 10. The Writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED June 20, 2008 ______________________________ JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU kvr [1] 2003 (3) Supreme Court Cases 437