Ashok Kumar vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeep Mehta, J.—The instant writ petition is directed against the orders Annexure 3 dated 28.5.2002 and Annexure-4 dated 9.7.2002 passed by the Grievance committee, Gram Panchayat Poharka whereby the service of the petitioner on the post of Para Physical Training Teacher was discontinued.

Facts in brief are that the petitioner and certain other persons applied for the post of Para Physical Training Teacher pursuant to an advertisement published by the Gram Panchayat in Poharka. The interviews were scheduled to be held on 20.5.2002. Total 12 candidates were shortlisted for the interview. The Gram Panchayat appointed the petitioner on the post adopting a resolution to the effect that he was the sole candidate to appear before the selection committee and thus despite having secured minimum marks i.e. 36.07%, he was selected out of the 12 candidates who had applied for the post. Another candidate who had secured higher marks namely Jagdish Chandra s/o Jhindu Ram respondent No. 5 filed a complaint before the Block Education Officer, Nohar, Hanumangarh alleging that fraud was committed in the selection process. A panel of minimum three candidates was required to be prepared but for giving undue advantage to the petitioner, only he was shown present from amongst the twelve shortlisted candidates. He specifically stated that he had also appeared before the Gram Sabha on 20.5.2002 and was made to sign a forged register instead of the original one and thereby the Panchayat contrived to show only the petitioner''s presence in the interview from amongst the shortlisted candidates.

An enquiry was directed to be initiated on the said complaint. The Grievance Committee after conducting initial enquiry submitted a report Annexure-2 dated 24.6.2002 concluding that the issue could not be resolved for lack of evidence. Thereafter, in pursuance of a telephonic message dated 9.7.2002 given by the District Collector, Hanumangarh, another meeting was convened and the matter was reconsidered.

The Grievance Committee considered the grievances of the aggrieved candidates and thereafter took a decision that the mode adopted by the Gram Panchayat in giving appointment to the present petitioner despite he having secured the minimum marks from amongst the shortlisted candidates was arbitrary and suspicious. The fact recorded in the minutes by the Gram Panchayat that no candidate other than the petitioner Ashok Kumar appeared before the selection committee was held to be doubtful. Five of Panchas gave in writing that they did not know as to whether Jagdish s/o Jhindu Ram appeared before the selection committee or not. In view of the suspicious nature of proceedings drawn by the Gram Panchayat, the matter was referred to the Collector Hanumangarh. Thereafter a fresh select list of candidates was prepared and vide order dated 28.5.2002, a decision was taken to appoint Jagdish s/o Jhindu Ram having highest marks on the post of Para Physical Training Teacher. The said decision was later on confirmed in the committee meeting held on 9.7.2002.

The petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition against the rejection of his candidature for being appointed as a Para Physical Training Teacher and the appointment given to respondent No. 5 on the said post.

Mr. N.M. Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that the Gram Panchayat followed lawful procedure and gave appointment to the petitioner on the post of Para Physical Training Teacher as none of the other shortlisted candidates apart from the petitioner appeared before the Selection Committee. He urged that the subsequent action of the respondents in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner and selecting the respondent No. 5 on the said post without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner is arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition deserves to be accepted and the order dated 20.5.2002 appointing the petitioner on the post of Para Physical Training Teacher be restored.

Per contra Mrs. Pratistha Dave, learned Addl. Government Counsel relies on the averments made in the reply and submits that the petitioner''s selection to the post of Para Physical Training Teacher was based on a fraudulent proceeding conducted by the Selection Committee. Despite the petitioner securing minimum number of marks i.e. 36.07%, he was selected on the post even though other more meritorious candidates had applied for selection. She submits that in order to select the petitioner, the attendance of other candidates was deliberately not marked in the record and they were fictitiously shown absent. This fact was fortified upon enquiry made under the directions of the District Collector. The petitioner had not been issued any appointment letter and thus there was no requirement for providing him any opportunity of hearing while cancelling the fraudulent selection process. She submits that the whole selection process was fraudulent and was rightly cancelled. Thus, she urged that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material on record.

After going through the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner had secured just 36.84% marks whereas in the list of the short listed candidates there were other qualified persons including the respondent No. 5 having much higher percentage of marks as compared to the petitioner. The enquiry report submitted by the Grievance Committee shows that the proceedings which were drawn up by the Gram Panchayat for selecting the petitioner were highly suspicious and were recorded fraudulently.

The Grievance Committee took a decision on 28.5.2002 to select Jagdish s/o Jhindu Ram respondent No. 5 having a much higher percentage of marks as compared to the petitioner on the post of Para Physical Training Teacher and the earlier selection process was scrapped.

In this view of the matter, selection of respondent No. 5 in place of the petitioner was just and proper. Apparently the very selection of the petitioner was shrouded under suspicious circumstances and suffered from arbitrary action.

The selection committee obviously acted in a dubious fashion while recording the minutes mentioning that only the petitioner appeared in the selection process and none of the other candidates from the select list came forward for the interviews. The whole selection process was evidently a sham. The absence of all but the petitioner in the interview was stage managed to deprive the more meritorious candidates and select the petitioner who was having bare 36.07% of marks. The case was meticulously examined by the District Collector in Revision No. 13/2002 preferred by the petitioner against the rejection of his candidature and proceedings of the Selection Committee were found to be corrupted. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the very inception of the matter i.e. the selection of the petitioner on the post of Para Physical Training Teacher was based on fraud. Thus, looking to the fact that the very selection process was fraudulent equity is not in favour of the petitioner. As the whole selection process itself has been scrapped there was no requirement to provide any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The impugned orders do not suffer from any arbitrariness and cannot be said to be violative of principles of natural justice so as to call for any interference in this writ petition.

Resultantly, the writ petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed.

No order as to costs.