Thirtyeight persons whose candidature for grade II police constable, jail warders and firemen posts in Tamil Nadu were rejected on the ground that they suppressed their involvement in criminal cases were today cleared for selection by the Madras High Court bench here.
The court was allowing a batch of petitions by the candidates challenging the rejection of their candidature after they passed the written and physical tests.
The petitioners' candidature were rejected by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Board on the ground that they had suppressed their involvement in criminal cases in their applications and during verification roll.
Justice R.S.Ramanathan, said the appointing authority cannot simply reject the application, he should satisfy himself about the suitability of the candidate, having regard to his involvement in criminal case and without considering the
same, the application should not have been rejected.
He, however, dismissed the petition of another candidate involved in a murder case, saying it was of serious nature.
Categorising the Petitions according to the nature of cases, he said some candidates did not disclose their involvement in the criminal case for reasons such as their names were not appearing in FIR or charge sheet.
"In My opinion such persons cannot be found guilty of suppression of facts," he said and allowed their petitions.
The others reasons, which the Judge said, could be allowed were no case was registered at the time of submission of applications; named in FIR but not mentioned in charge sheet, petty cases and juveniles when the offence was commissioned.
Referring to the case of 17 petitioners who were involved in criminal cases and then 'honourably acquitted', the Judge said a larger bench of the Supreme Court was seized of the matter.
Allowing their petition, the Judge said their selection would be subject to the final judgement of the apex court.
The Judge said there is a saying "Every saint had a past, Every thief has a future."
Considering the fact that offences in which the petitioners were involved could not be characterised as one involving moral turpitude, such persons must be given a chance to reform themselves, he said.
Further it was always open to the department to take action against them in the event of their involvement in criminal cases in future.
