Puducherry: CID Police has registered a case against a head constable Molestation with government records to increase Mark He scored in an examination for the recruitment of sub-inspectors Puducherry.
Police said head constable R Pandyan attached to Villianur police station appeared for a written test conducted by the government on May 22, 2004. Pandyan, who did not clear the examination held more than 16 years ago, had filed a petition under the RTI Act. On March 17 last year, he sought permission to inspect the files related to the recruitment and check the marks obtained by him in the examination.
When he was invited to inspect the documents on July 27 last year, he tampered with the records and corrected his marks in Paper II as 87 as against the original mark of 57 as expected. The enhanced marks will ensure his selection as Sub-Inspector if he takes up the issue with the competent authorities.
Pandyan had submitted a representation to the Under Secretary (Home) on August 13 last year, seeking his appointment to the post of sub-inspector with retrospective effect from May 22, 2004 and promotion as inspector. Was.
The concerned section in the police department, which deals with the recruitment/promotion of policemen and finalization of their seniority, started verification of his documents on September 11 last year and found that he had tampered with the marks obtained in Paper II. The digit ‘5’ was manipulated to read ‘8’. However, the total marks (110) highlighting the malpractice remained the same.
Superintendent Kaunalen Satis filed a complaint with the CID police, which gave Pandyane 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for the purpose of fraud) and 471 (forgery document or electronic record) ) registered a case under Indian Penal Code and started the inquiry.
Police said head constable R Pandyan attached to Villianur police station appeared for a written test conducted by the government on May 22, 2004. Pandyan, who did not clear the examination held more than 16 years ago, had filed a petition under the RTI Act. On March 17 last year, he sought permission to inspect the files related to the recruitment and check the marks obtained by him in the examination.
When he was invited to inspect the documents on July 27 last year, he tampered with the records and corrected his marks in Paper II as 87 as against the original mark of 57 as expected. The enhanced marks will ensure his selection as Sub-Inspector if he takes up the issue with the competent authorities.
Pandyan had submitted a representation to the Under Secretary (Home) on August 13 last year, seeking his appointment to the post of sub-inspector with retrospective effect from May 22, 2004 and promotion as inspector. Was.
The concerned section in the police department, which deals with the recruitment/promotion of policemen and finalization of their seniority, started verification of his documents on September 11 last year and found that he had tampered with the marks obtained in Paper II. The digit ‘5’ was manipulated to read ‘8’. However, the total marks (110) highlighting the malpractice remained the same.
Superintendent Kaunalen Satis filed a complaint with the CID police, which gave Pandyane 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for the purpose of fraud) and 471 (forgery document or electronic record) ) registered a case under Indian Penal Code and started the inquiry.
.