{"id":222932,"date":"2005-02-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-02-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005"},"modified":"2015-08-18T11:14:22","modified_gmt":"2015-08-18T05:44:22","slug":"secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005","title":{"rendered":"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  1014 of 2005\n\nPETITIONER:\nSecy. Deptt. of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; Ors. \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nRESPONDENT:\nB. Chinnam Naidu \t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 09\/02\/2005\n\nBENCH:\nARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; S.H. KAPADIA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<br \/>\n(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 2269 of 2004 <\/p>\n<p>ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tChallenge in this appeal is to legality of the judgment of a<br \/>\nDivision Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court  setting aside the<br \/>\norder passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (in short<br \/>\nthe &#8216;Tribunal&#8217;) and holding that authorities were not justified in<br \/>\ndenying appointment to the respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tA brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe respondent appeared for the recruitment test conducted for<br \/>\nthe selection of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable (Civil) in<br \/>\nVisakhapatnam. He was successful  in the test and thereafter he was<br \/>\nsubjected  to medical test.  After the two tests were over, he was<br \/>\nrequired to undergo training. But he was not sent for training on the<br \/>\nground that the Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam  by order dated<br \/>\n5.5.2003 had directed that he was not to be sent for training.<br \/>\nQuestioning legality of such order, the respondent filed an Original<br \/>\nApplication before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the<br \/>\nexamination for selection was conducted on 16.3.2003.  Subsequently, he<br \/>\nunderwent the physical test and was successful. By order dated<br \/>\n28.4.2003 the Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam informed the<br \/>\nrespondent about his selection and directed him to report at the<br \/>\nDistrict Police Office at Visakhapatnam for further medical test.  He<br \/>\nwas also directed to carry with him uniforms and other items necessary<br \/>\nfor training which was organized at Central Police Lines, Amberpet.<br \/>\nThough, the respondent was subjected to medical examination he was not<br \/>\nallowed to join the training programme.  He was informed that since he<br \/>\nhad been arrested in crime No. 28\/2000 on the file of Police Station,<br \/>\nKukatpally, registered under various provisions of the Indian Penal<br \/>\nCode, 1860 (in short the &#8216;IPC&#8217;) and Andhra Pradesh Public Examination<br \/>\nPrevention of Malpractice and Unfair Means Act, 1997 he was not<br \/>\neligible to be appointed. Before the Tribunal the respondent took the<br \/>\nstand that since he had not been charged and had not been convicted and<br \/>\nsince he had no connection with the crime, the order of the<br \/>\nSuperintendent of Police was not tenable.  His further stand was that<br \/>\nthe case was registered in respect of the earlier recruitment test in<br \/>\nthe year 2000 and there was no reason to debar him since there was no<br \/>\nconviction, and, therefore, the action of the authority is not proper.<br \/>\nThe present appellants filed counter-affidavit stating that before<br \/>\nfinal verification the respondent was permitted to appear in the<br \/>\nexamination and the tests.  Subsequently, it was noticed that the<br \/>\nrespondent herein was arrested on 16.1.2000 and was sent to judicial<br \/>\ncustody in the case referred to above.  That case was under<br \/>\ninvestigation and Forensic Science Laboratory report was awaited.  The<br \/>\napplicant while submitting Attestation Form after completion of written<br \/>\nexamination did not mention about his arrest and the pending case which<br \/>\nhe was required to do.  Since he had suppressed the truth in terms of<br \/>\nthe instructions laid down in Declaration at Cl. No. 3, the respondent<br \/>\nhad incurred disqualification and he was not a fit person for<br \/>\nemployment under the Government.  The Tribunal noted that against Col.<br \/>\nNo. 12 of the Attestation Form, the respondent had not mentioned about<br \/>\nthe pending case and had not even indicated about his arrest.  This<br \/>\namounted to suppression of truth in the Attestation Form and<br \/>\nDeclaration at column No.3.  Therefore, in terms of the instructions he<br \/>\nhad incurred disqualification and was unfit for employment under the<br \/>\nGovernment.  The Tribunal held that the respondent was not a person of<br \/>\ngood conduct and character since he had suppressed material information<br \/>\nwhile filling up the Attestation Form.  He did not deserve any relief.<br \/>\nAccordingly the Original Application was dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>The matter was challenged before the Andhra Pradesh High Court<br \/>\nand by the impugned judgment it was held that there was no requirement<br \/>\nunder Column No. 12 to mention about any pending case or arrest and,<br \/>\ntherefore, the action of the authorities, in not permitting the<br \/>\nrespondent to join the training, cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>In support of the appeal the learned counsel appearing on behalf<br \/>\nof the appellants submitted that the Tribunal had correctly held that<br \/>\nthe respondent was guilty of suppression of material facts and taking<br \/>\ninto consideration the conduct and character the Tribunal had rightly<br \/>\nheld that he was not entitled to any relief, and High Court should not<br \/>\nhave interfered with the order.  Reference was made to some cases where<br \/>\nthis Court has held that giving of incorrect reply and suppressing<br \/>\nmaterial facts while filling up the Application Form or Attestation<br \/>\nForm or Declaration disentitles the candidate for any relief.<br \/>\nParticular reference was made to the case of Kendriya Vidyalaya<br \/>\nSangathan &amp; Ors. Vs.  Ram Ratan  Yadav [2003 (3) SCC 437].\n<\/p>\n<p>In response, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted<br \/>\nthat there was no requirement to mention about the arrest or the<br \/>\npending case, therefore, High Court&#8217;s order is perfectly justified.\n<\/p>\n<p>In Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan&#8217;s case (supra) the factual<br \/>\nposition can be ascertained from paragraphs 8 and 9 which read as<br \/>\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;8.- The Attestation Form dated 26.6.1998 duly<br \/>\nfilled in by the respondent and attestation<br \/>\nshow that the respondent has taken BA degree<br \/>\nfrom St. Aloysius College, JBP and Bed and Med<br \/>\ndegrees from R. Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya, JBP.<br \/>\nColumns 12 and 13 as filled up read thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;12.- Have you ever been prosecuted\/kept under<br \/>\ndetention or bound down\/fined, convicted by a<br \/>\ncourt of law of any offence?  &#8211; No.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;13.- Is any case pending against you in any<br \/>\ncourt of law at the time of filling up this<br \/>\nAttestation Form?- No.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;9.- The respondent has also certified the<br \/>\ninformation given in the said Attestation Form<br \/>\nas under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;I certify that the foregoing information is<br \/>\ncorrect and complete to the best of my<br \/>\nknowledge and belief.  I am not aware of any<br \/>\ncircumstances which might impair my fitness for<br \/>\nemployment under Government.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>As is noted in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan&#8217;s case (supra) the object<br \/>\nof requiring information in various columns like Column No. 12 of the<br \/>\nAttestation Form and declaration thereafter by the candidate is to<br \/>\nascertain and verify the character and antecedents to judge his<br \/>\nsuitability to enter into or continue in service. When a candidate<br \/>\nsuppresses material information and\/or gives false information he<br \/>\ncannot claim any right for appointment or continuance in service.<br \/>\nThere can be no dispute to this position in law. But on the facts of<br \/>\nthe case it cannot be said that the respondent had made false<br \/>\ndeclaration or had suppressed material information.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn order to appreciate the rival submissions it is necessary to<br \/>\ntake note of Column No. 12 of the Attestation Form and Column No.3 of<br \/>\nthe declaration. The relevant portions are quoted below:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Column No.12- Have you ever been convicted by a<br \/>\ncourt of law or detained under any State\/Central<br \/>\npreventive detention laws for any offence whether<br \/>\nsuch conviction sustained in court of appeal or<br \/>\nset aside by the appellate court if appealed<br \/>\nagainst.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Column No.3- I am fully aware that furnishing of<br \/>\nfalse information or suppression of any actual<br \/>\ninformation in the Attestation Form would be a<br \/>\ndisqualification and is likely to render me unfit<br \/>\nfor employment under the Government.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>A bare perusal of the extracted portions show that the candidate<br \/>\nis required to indicate as to whether he has ever been convicted by a<br \/>\ncourt of law or detained under any State\/Central preventive detention<br \/>\nlaws for any offences whether such conviction is sustained or set aside<br \/>\nby the appellate court, if appealed against. The candidate is not<br \/>\nrequired to indicate as to whether he had been arrested in any case or<br \/>\nas to whether any case was pending.  Conviction by a court or detention<br \/>\nunder any State\/Central Preventive Detention Laws is different from<br \/>\narrest in any case or pendency of a case.  By answering that the<br \/>\nrespondent had not been convicted or detained under Preventive<br \/>\nDetention Laws it cannot be said that he had suppressed any material<br \/>\nfact or had furnished any false information or suppressed any<br \/>\ninformation in the Attestation Form to incur disqualification. The<br \/>\nState Government and the Tribunal appeared to have proceeded on the<br \/>\nbasis that the respondent ought to have indicated the fact of arrest or<br \/>\npendency of the case, though column No. 12 of the Attestation Form did<br \/>\nnot require such information being furnished.  The learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe appellants submitted that such a requirement has to be read into an<br \/>\nAttestation Form.  We find no reason to accept such contention. There<br \/>\nwas no specific requirement to mention as to whether any case is<br \/>\npending or whether the applicant had been arrested. In view of the<br \/>\nspecific language so far as Column No. 12 is concerned the respondent<br \/>\ncannot be found guilty of any suppression.\n<\/p>\n<p>In Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan&#8217;s case (supra), the position was<br \/>\nthe reverse.  There the candidate took the stand that as there was no<br \/>\nconviction, his negative answers to columns 12 to 13 were not wrong.<br \/>\nThis Court did not accept the stand that requirement was conviction and<br \/>\nnot prosecution in view of the information required under columns 12<br \/>\nand 13 as quoted above.  The requirement was &#8220;prosecution&#8221; and not<br \/>\n&#8220;conviction&#8221;.  The logic has application here.  The requirement in the<br \/>\npresent case is &#8220;conviction&#8221; and not &#8220;prosecution&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>The question whether he was a desirable person to be appointed in<br \/>\nGovernment service was not the subject matter of adjudication and the<br \/>\nTribunal was not justified in recording any finding in that regard.<br \/>\nWhether a person is fit to be appointed or not is a matter within the<br \/>\nspecial domain of the Government. For denying somebody appointment<br \/>\nafter he is selected, though he has no right to be appointed, has to be<br \/>\ngoverned by some statutory provisions.  That was not the issue which<br \/>\nwas to be adjudicated in the present case.  The only issue related to<br \/>\nsuppression of facts or mis-declaration.\n<\/p>\n<p>In view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in this appeal which<br \/>\nis accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1014 of 2005 PETITIONER: Secy. Deptt. of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; Ors. RESPONDENT: B. Chinnam Naidu DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09\/02\/2005 BENCH: ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; S.H. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-222932","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; ... vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; ... vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-18T05:44:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-18T05:44:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1698,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\",\"name\":\"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; ... vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-18T05:44:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; ... vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; ... vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-18T05:44:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005","datePublished":"2005-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-18T05:44:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005"},"wordCount":1698,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005","name":"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; ... vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-18T05:44:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/secy-deptt-of-home-secy-a-p-vs-b-chinnam-naidu-on-9-february-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Secy. Deptt. Of Home Secy.A.P. &amp; &#8230; vs B. Chinnam Naidu on 9 February, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222932","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=222932"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222932\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=222932"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=222932"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=222932"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}