Jail warden candidate’s disqualification quashed
Kaushik Kannan | TNN | Dec 9, 2019, 04:08 IST
Get Notifications on latest Madurai News
Madurai: Madras high court has quashed the disqualification of a person to the post of grade II jail warden on the ground that he had suppressed the pendency of a case against him, and directed the state government to appoint him to the post.
The notification for the posts of grade II police constables/grade II jail wardens and firemen was issued on January 23, 2017. Petitioner P Muthurasu completed all tests and was provisionally selected for the post of grade II jail warden.
However, on police verification, it was found that a criminal case for kidnapping was registered against him at Palamedu police station in Madurai. Subsequently, an order was passed on November 17, 2017 disqualifying the selection, saying that the petitioner had suppressed the pendency of criminal case against him.
Challenging the order, the petitioner stated that he had applied for the recruitment on February 9, 2017 while the case was registered only on June 23 that year. Hence the question of suppression does not arise.
He further submitted that the case was closed as mistake of fact since he had married the girl who he allegedly kidnapped and they were living together happily. The additional government pleader stated that according to the GO dated October 17, 2018 passed by the home (prisons II) department, if the petitioner’s involvement in a criminal case is detected during police verification, it could be taken for disqualification.
Justice M S Ramesh observed that since a criminal case was registered after the petitioner submitted his application, the order stating that he had suppressed the pendency of the case is improper.
“It is now found out that there is no criminal case against the petitioner and as a matter of fact the girl who is alleged to have been kidnapped has also filed an affidavit before the concerned judicial magistrate court stating that she has not been kidnapped,” the judge said adding that the reasoning in the disqualification order is unsustainable.