Ramireddy Karunakar Reddy, v. The State Of Telangana,

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WP No.30095 of 2017 ORDER:

It is the case of the petitioners that the 1st petitioner belongs to OC and the 2nd petitioner belongs to BC-D community and both are natives of Nalgonda District. Both the petitioners have acquired the qualification required for the post of Police Constable and that they have been appointed as Home Guards in the year 2007 and were removed from service without notice in the year 2011.

That the 3rd respondent issued recruitment notification-2008(2) to fill up the posts of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constables in Civil (Men), AR (Men), APSP (Men), SPF, SAR, CPL (Men), Firemen, Warders (Male) and other posts in December, 2008 and that as the petitioners have fulfilled the requisite qualifications, they have applied to the post of SCT PC (civil)(men), SCT PC (AR)(men), Warders(male), Constable(men) in SPF Department, SCT PC (SAR CPL) (men), SCT PC (APSP) (men) and fireman. The petitioners have qualified in all the tests viz., preliminary selection test, physical measurement, physical efficiency test and also written examination conducted on 13.09.2009.

for training along with other selected candidates. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, who submits that though criminal case is registered against the petitioners, no charge sheet is filed and on that ground, petitioners cannot be denied appointment. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for services submits that since serious allegation of impersonation is made against the petitioners, they cannot be appointed in the selected posts.

It is to be seen that when petitioners are provisionally selected, unless the same is cancelled, petitioners cannot be denied appointment to the post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable. If the respondents intend to take action against the petitioners, they have to issue notice to the petitioners before initiating any action against them and that they cannot kept their selection pending for years together. In view of the same, it is open for the petitioners to make appropriate representation ventilating their grievance to the 2nd respondent and on such representation being made by the petitioners; the 2nd

respondent is directed to take appropriate action on the same, within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt representation.

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 21.09.2017 tk.

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WP No.30095 of 2017 Date: 21.09.2017 tk