- (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred mainly for getting appointment on the post of Police Constable on the ground that the petitioner has been selected and has submitted although original certificates alongwith photographs at the time of verification, but, he has never been posted on the post of Police Constable. It is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has cleared written as well as physical tests required for the post of Constable.
(2.) I have heard counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. who has submitted that counter affidavit has already been filed by respondent no. 4. Petitioner has changed the photograph of the original candidate and therefore, as narrated in paragraph -6 of the counter affidavit, a fraud has been played during the selection process. The signature of the Deputy Superintendent of Police was also found missing. Thus, somebody else has appeared in the qualifying written as well as physical tests in place of the petitioner. The seal of the Superintendent of Police, Chaibasa on the photograph is found missing. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for the appointment on the post of Constable. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that In original application a candidate has to affix photograph which will be having stamp of Superintendent of Police, Chaibasa half of the stamp will be on the photograph and remaining half or remaining part of the seal of Superintendent of. Police, Chaibasa will be on application form. Looking to Annexure -A to the counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 4 and looking to the paragraph -6 to the counter affidavit, it appears that on photograph, there is no seal of Superintendent of Police, Chaibasa, whereas the remaining part of the seal is on application form. Thus, it appears that photograph of the applicant was changed. Looking to the contentions raised in paragraph -6 to the counter affidavit, the present petitioner has never appeared in the written as well as physical tests, but, somebody else has remain present and has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Thus, a fraud has been played by the petitioner during the selection process. Fraud vitiates the whole selection of the petitioner. In view of this fact, I am not inclined to exercise extra -ordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to dispel the clouds of fraud in the nature of cogent and convincing evidences, will be required to be taken and therefore, because of highly disputed question of facts are involved in this petition. I am not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. There is no substance in this petition. Hence, this writ petition is, hereby, dismissed.;