K.Radhakrishnan v. The Director General Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI K.Radhakrishnan ... Appellant -vs1.The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai - 4.
2.The Director, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Anna Salai, Chennai.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.14420 of 2018, dated 10.05.2019.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Aswin Raja Simman For Respondents : Mr.P.Veerakathiravan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by S.R.A.Ramachandran
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.] The rejection of the appellant's candidature for appointment as Grade II Constable in the Tamil Nadu Police Service was the subject matter of the Writ Petition. The Writ Court dismissed the Writ Petition, by order dated 10.05.2019, following the judgment in Honble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh v. Union of India and Commissioner of Police, New Delhi and another v. Mehar Singh. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:- "33. So far as respondent Mehar Singh is concerned, his case appears to have been compromised. It was urged that acquittal recorded pursuant to a compromise should not be treated as a disqualification because that will frustrate the purpose of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. We see no merit in this submission.
Compromises or settlements have to be encouraged to bring about peaceful and amiable atmosphere in the society by according a quietus to disputes. They have to be encouraged also to reduce arrears of cases and save the litigants from the agony of pending litigation. But these considerations cannot be brought in here. In order to maintain integrity and high standard of police force, the Screening Committee may decline to take cognizance of a compromise, if it appears to it to be dubious. The Screening Committee cannot be faulted for that."
2.Subsequently, also in the case of Chandra Yadav v. Union of India reported in 2023 (7) SCC 536, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken the same view. We had followed the said judgment in W.A.(MD)No. 609 of 2023 and disposed of on 12.06.2023. We see no reason to deviate from the view, which have already taken.
3.Hence, the Writ Appeal fails and it is accordingly, dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.] 02.09.2024 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet: Yes Mrn To 1.The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai - 4.
2.The Director, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Anna Salai, Chennai.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
R.SUBRAMANIAN , J.
and L.VICTORIA GOWRI , J.
Mrn 02.09.2024