TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, J. - (1.) The instant writ petition has been preferred challenging an order dated 21st September, 2015 passed by the learned tribunal in OA No.1530 of 2013.
(2.) The facts, in a nutshell, are that the petitioner participated in a selection process of the year 2002 for appointment to the post of constable under Kolkata Police. Though the petitioner emerged to be successful, no appointment letter was issued. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the learned tribunal and the said application, being WPST 656 of 2007, along with other similar matters were rejected by a judgment dated 11th July, 2006. Challenging the same, the petitioner approached this Court and by an order dated 5th December, 2007 this Court directed the respondents to take steps for appointment in accordance with law. Challenging the said order the State authorities preferred Special Leave Petitions and the same were ultimately dismissed by an order dated 6th January, 2008. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner preferred an application for contempt and ultimately the Kolkata Police authorities summoned the petitioner for a medical test on 10th August, 2011 and also directed him to submit the verification roll. In the verification roll under column 13 it was questioned "Have you ever been convicted by a court in any offence or charge - sheeted by the police in connection with criminal proceeding. If so, full particulars of the case should be given -. The petitioner answered that "No, charge -sheeted in Mangolkot P.S. Case No.83 of 2006 dated 14.7.2006 under sections 498A/304B/34 of Indian Penal Code arising out of G.R.Case No.251 of 2006 in connection with Sessions Case No.117 of 2008". Thereafter the respondents maintained a deceptive silence and as such the petitioner issued a letter dated 22nd May, 2013 but as the same was not responded to and as no order was passed by the competent authority, the petitioner was constrained to approach the learned tribunal and the said application was dismissed by the order impugned in the present petition.
(3.) A perusal of the order impugned reveals that the learned tribunal was pleased to reject the petitioner's application placing reliance upon a judgment delivered in the case of State of West Bengal and Others -vs - Sk. Nazrul Islam wherein it was held "Surely, the authorities entrusted with the responsibility of appointing constables were under duty to verify the antecedents of a candidate to find out whether he is suitable for the post of constable and so long as the candidate has not been acquitted in the criminal case of the charges under Section 148/323/380/427/596 IPC, he cannot possibly be held to be suitable for appointment to the post of Constable". The learned tribunal was pleased to hold that the said decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the case and observed that "having a wholesome appreciation of the entire issue we feel that at the present stage, pending decision in the Trial this O.A. fails and is accordingly disposed of".;