The Madras High Court Bench here has directed the Home Secretary, Director General of Police and Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB) to make sure that every order rejecting the candidature of those aspiring to join the police force should contain information about the remedy of appeal, if any, available to the candidates.
The First Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice S. Manikumar passed the order while disposing of a writ appeal filed by I. Rajesh Kumar of Kanyakumari district who claimed that he was not aware of his right to appeal challenging his rejection on medical grounds during the recruitment for Tamil Nadu Special Police Youth Brigade last year.
“We are of the view that all candidates may not know the remedy for their rejection and when appeal is provided for, the rejection letter must mandatorily state the remedy available. We thus direct the respondents that in all future communications of rejection, remedy against rejection should be specifically stated in the letter of rejection itself,” the First Bench said.
Insofar as the writ petitioner was concerned, the judges ordered that he should be subjected to medical examination once again since he had disputed the rejection on the ground of suffering from cross legs. “The fate of the appellant could be decided only by the result of the medical examination. Needless to say that if he clears it, steps should be taken for further process of selection.”
In his affidavit, the appellant claimed that TNUSRB had issued him a provisional selection letter on January 18 last year and asked him to undergo medical examination. Subsequently, there was no communication for long and only through applications made under the Right to Information Act the appellant came to know that he was declared ineligible on February 14, 2014 for being cross legged.
Armed with the rejection letter obtained under the RTI on November 27, the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court. However, a single judge of the High Court dismissed it on December 23 and hence the present writ appeal.
