- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Appellants participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of police constables S.C.T.P.C. (Civil) (Men) initiated as per Notification dated 30.12.2008 issued by the first Respondent. According to the Appellants, as there was inordinate delay in the announcement of results of the written examination, they staged a dharna in front of the District Police Office, Kakinada along with many other candidates on 17.04.2010 demanding announcement of the results without delay. It is alleged that the protestors were removed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kakinada II Police Station and were taken to the police station and were released after some time. Subsequently, the results were announced. Appellants were successful and, on being selected, they were sent for the nine months induction training w.e.f. 17.04.2011. While they were undergoing the training, Memorandum dated 20.04.2011 was issued by the first Respondent stating that the Appellants were selected on account of an oversight regarding their involvement in a criminal case and, hence, their selection should be cancelled. Accordingly, the Principal of the Police Training College discharged the Appellants and four others as per memorandum dated 21.4.2011. The Appellants approached the Andhra Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, which by order dated 28.09.2011, dismissed their applications holding as follows: The applicants signed the attestation forms on 27.12.2010, 28.12.2010 and 29.12.2010 respectively and in column No. 16, they declared that they were not involved in any criminal case and they were not arrestee. The incident took place on 17.4.2010 whereas the attesting forms were signed by the applicants on 27.12.2010, 28.12.2010 and 29.12.2010 respectively. Clearly the applicants suppressed the information regarding the registration of the case and also their arrest. Therefore, there are no merits in the OA., and the O.A. is, accordingly, dismissed ...
(3.) The order of the Administrative Tribunal was challenged before the High Court, leading to the impugned order dated 10.04.2012. The High Court concurred with the view taken by the Administrative Tribunal.;