IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2010 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32577 of 2010(V) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: - --------------------- SHINE.S.S,S/O.STANLEY,AYANTYARMOOLA, CHEENAVILA, KOOVALASSERY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.RAJAN VELLOTH SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI RESPONDENTS:- ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 698001 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUAERTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695002 3. THE COMMANDANT, KAP 4TH BATTALION, KANNUR, MANGATTUPARAMBU, 670003 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 32577 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th 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 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 such other writ, direction or order directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to join the training for police constable under KAP 4th Batallion, Kannur subject to the condition that he will forfeit his services if he is found guilty in any of the criminal cases pending against him.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. W.P.(C)No. 32577 of 2010 -2- 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 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 W.P.(C)No. 32577 of 2010 -3- 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 shg/