KARRI RAM BABU AND OTHERS versus CHAIRMAN, STATE LEVEL POLICE RECRUITMENT BOARD, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS

Citation: [2013] 17 S.C.R. 947 · Decided: 11-07-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: GYAN SUDHA MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

(2013] 17 S.C.R. 947 
KARRI RAM BABU AND OTHERS 
v 
. 
CHAIRMAN, STATE L.EVEL POLICE RECRUITMENT 
BOARD, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 11387 of 2013) 
JULY 11, 2013. 
[GYAN SUDHA MISRA AND KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
A. 
B 
c 
Discharge of police constables for suppressing 
information in attestation form - Appellants participating in a 
'dharna' - Removed to police station and released - Held: It 
cannot be said that the appellants were aware of the fact that 
they had been involved in any criminal case -
There is no 
D 
question of their suppressing any fact regarding their alleged 
arrest - Impugned orders and memoranda quashed - In order 
to do r:;omplete justice, benefit also given to third petitioner 
before High Court and Tribunal, who could not approach 
Supreme Court owing to financial constraints -
Constitution 
E 
of India, 1950 - Art. 142 rlw Art. 136 - Appeal - Benefit 
eJ6lended to non-appellant-trainee .. 
The appellants participated in the process of 
selection for appointment to the post of police constables 
S.C.T.P.C. (Civil) (Men). As there was inordinate delay in 
F 
the announcement of results of the written examination, 
they along with many others staged a dharna in front of 
the District Police Office on 17,4.2010. The protestors 
were removed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, and were · 
taken to the police station and were released after some 
G 
time the_same day. Subsequently, the results were 
announced. The appellants were selected and Were sent 
for training where a Memorandum dated 20.04.2011 was 
.. issued to them by the first respondent stating that they 
·947 
· H 
948 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013] 17 S.C.R. 
A were selected on account of an oversight regarding their 
involvement in a criminal case and, therefore, their 
selection should be cancelled. Accordingly, the Principal 
of the Police Training College discharged the appellants 
as per memorandum dated 21.4.2011. The State 
B Administrative Tribunal dismissed their applications 
holding that in the attestation forms, which they filled in 
December, 2010, they suppressed the information 
regarding the registration of the case and ais'o their arrest 
which had taken place on 17.4.2010. The High Court 
c affirmed the view of the Administrative Tribunal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. It has been recorded in the FIR that the 
appellants were removed u/s 151 of the Code of Criminal 
D Procedure, 1973. There is no case that the appellants had 
,been informed of their arrest or that they had been 
released on bail. It cannot be said that the appellants 
were aware of the fact that they had been involved in any 
criminal case. The attestation form would show that only 
E if the first question regarding involvement in any criminal 
case is answered in affirmative, the rest of the columns 
needed to be filled-up. As the appellants were not aware 
of their involvement in any criminal case, there is no 
question of their suppressing any fact regarding their 
F alleged arrest. [para 7] [952-F-H; 953-A] 
1.2. The impugned judgment dated 10.04.2012 of the 
High Court, order dated 28.09.2011 of the Administrative 
Tribunal and the impugned memoranda dated 20.04.2011 
and 21.04.2011 are set aside. The appellants shall be re-
G inducted for training immediately and permitted to 
complete the training to the extent of the unexpired 
period. Their original seniority shall be restored. 
However, they shall not be entitled to any emoluments 
during the period they had been kept out. In order to do 
H complete justice in the cause, it is made clear that the 
KARRI RAM BABU v. CHAIRMAN, STATE LEVEL POLICE 
949 
RECRUITMENT BOARD, HYDERABAD 
benefit of this judgment shall be available to the third 
A 
petitioner before the Tribunal and the High Court, in case 
he is interested. [paras 8-9] [953-D-E, H; 954-A] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
11387 of 2013. 
B 
From the Judgment & Order dated 10.4.2012 of the High 
Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ 
Petition W.P. No. 9729 of 2012. 
G.V.R. Choudary, A. Chandra Sekhar, K. Shivraj c 
Choudhari for the f\ppellants. 
A.T.M. Rangaramanjam, B. Debojit, G.N. Reddy for. the 
Respondents. 
~, 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
D 
KURIAN, J. Leave granted. 
2. Appellants participated in the process of selection for 
appointment to the post of police constables S.C.T.P.C. (Civil) 
E 
(Men) initiated as per Notification dated 30.12.2
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.