IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2010 / 13TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30546 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRIYESH C., CHEMBEKASSERY HOUSE, BLATHOOR, COLAKKARY, KALLIAD P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT-670 593. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.RATNAKARAN SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT., HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMANDANT, KAP IVTH BATTALION, MANGATTUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, KASARAGOD. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.30546 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 5th day of October, 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 Suresh v. Public Service Commission [2008 (2) KLT 441]. The petitioner also submits that relying on those judgments, similar cases have been disposed of by Exts.P3 and P4 judgments. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs; “(i) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to join for the training pursuant to Ext.P1 advise memo issued by the 3rd respondent. (ii) Declare that merely for the reason that the petitioner is an accused in a criminal case, appointment cannot be denied to him. (iii) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to join for the training in pursuance to Ext.P1 advise memo issued by the 3rd respondent.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. From Ext.P3 and P4 I find that a learned Judge of this Court has issued certain directions in respect of similar cases. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as follows: The respondents shall permit the petitioner to attend the ensuing 2 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. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge