Prasenjit Mandal, J. - (1.) This writ application is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.7.2001 passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 681 of 2000 dismissing the application of the writ applicant. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order, this writ application has been preferred.
(2.) The fact of the case in brief is that the writ applicant got a call letter on 9.2.1999 from the Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Kakdwip, District-South 24 Parganas for a selection test to the post of a constable against the existing vacancies in the West Bengal Police Service. Accordingly, the writ applicant appeared before the selection Board at Alipore, District-South 24 Parganas and he completed all the tests for recruitment of a police personnel and lastly he was selected for the said post. He filled up the Verification Roll in the prescribed form. He passed the Class-VIII examination and so he took the help of a relation to fill up the Verification Roll, but ultimately he did not get any response for an appointment from the respondents. Later he learnt that he was not offered for an appointment in the said post because of adverse entry in the said Verification Roll. The writ applicant has stated that he was acquitted of the case bearing No. Magrahat P.S. Case No. 90 dated 16.7.1998 under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. He asked for an appointment but in vain. So he filed the application before the State Administrative Tribunal which rejected his application. So the present writ application has been filed by him.
(3.) Having gone through the materials on record and the submissions of the learned Advocate of the writ applicant, we find that the writ applicant underwent several tests for recruitment to the post of a constable under the West Bengal Police Service and thereafter he was asked to submit the Verification Roll which was duly filled up by him. It is not in dispute that the writ applicant filled up the Verification Roll and submitted the same to the Respondent Authority on 20.3.1999 (vide annexure R-2). It is surprising to note that the writ applicant had answered in the negative by putting the word "No" against the column No. 12 of the said Verification whether he had been arrested, detained or convicted by a Court of any offence; while the fact remained that the writ applicant was arrested and detained in the Magrahat P.S. Case No. 90 dated 16.7.1998. That was actually a case under Section 498- A/306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the writ applicant and others over the death of the wife of the writ applicant. It is not in dispute that the writ applicant was acquitted of the charge under Section 498-A/306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code by the judgment dated 7.1.2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Fourth Court, Alipore in the session's case arising out of the Magrahat P.S. Case No. 90 dated 16.7.1998 under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. As the writ applicant was very much involved for the death of his wife, Mafia Bibi such fact was very much within the special knowledge of the writ applicant and it could not be said at all that the writ applicant was unaware of such fact. But in spite of knowing such fact very well, the writ applicant had answered "No" against the column No. 12 of his Verification Roll (vide annexure R-2). Such suppression of a fact was no doubt, we hold, a serious misconduct on the part of the writ applicant before his appointment in the West Bengal Police Service. For that reason the Respondent Authority considered that the suppression of such a fact was a serious offence and for that reason he was considered unsuitable for an entry in the Government service. So he was not recruited as a constable in the West Bengal Police Service (vide annexure R-1). Therefore, we are of the view that the action of the Respondent Authority could not be said to be perverse, unreasonable and arbitrary at all.;