Pavitra Bohra vs Rajasthan Public Service Commission

Bela M. Trivedi, J.—In the instant petition, the result dated 17/9/2014 declared by the respondent-Commission for the post of Teacher Gr. II (Social Science), and the selection process in pursuance to the advertisement dated 2/8/2013, and the examination conducted on 23/2/2014 have been sought to be challenged by the petitioner on the ground that there was a leakage of question paper bearing Code 36 (Social Science)-Paper II-D Question Series No. 36137740 at the Bikaner Centre.

It has been alleged by the petitioner interalia that pursuant to the advertisement dated 2/8/2013 issued for the post of Teacher Gr. II-Social Science, examination was scheduled on 23/2/2014. The said examination was fixed between 9 A.M. to 11: 30 A.M. According to the petitioner while the said examination was going on, the police had conducted a raid at Plot No. 11, Marudhar Nagar, Pawanpuri, Bikaner, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner, where certain persons were found involved in the leakage of the said question paper, and in respect of which an FIR bearing No. 57/2014 was registered at the Police Station Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner. It is further case of the petitioner that in respect of the other examinations also conducted by the RPSC during said period, certain irregularities and leakage of paper were found for which even the officers of RPSC were arrested. According to the petitioner, instead of cancelling the examination for the said post of Teacher Gr. II (Social Science), the RPSC declared the result on 17/9/2014. Thus, the said result being tainted one was illegal and had stood vitiated and the RPSC could not have proceeded further with the appointments on the basis of such results.

The said petition has been resisted to by the respondent RPSC by filing the reply, denying the allegations made in the petition, and further contending interalia that the petitioner, after having participated in the process of selection, and after having been declared unsuccessful has challenged the result. It has been further contended that the RPSC had received about 3,46,068 applications for the 706 posts of Teacher Grade II Social Science and had conducted the examination for the said posts, in which the petitioner had appeared from the Jaipur Centre. The respondent has further stated that the FIR was registered at Police Station, Bikaner, on having received the information at 8 A.M. on 23/2/2014 that some persons were trying to copy or commit cheating of answers with the help of some mobile instruments, and that the police had rushed to the alleged place i.e. house No. 11, Marudhar Colony, Bikaner, and found six persons with computers, books and some papers, including a scanned copy of the question paper No. 36137740 for Teacher Gr. II Social Science D Series. According to the respondent Commission, some other complaints were also received from the other Centres at Jodhpur, Jalore, Kota, Tonk, Bandikui and Kotputli where the incidents like some persons having tried to take out the question paper outside the examination centre and some using bluetooth in their mobile phones outside the examination centre were reported, however no incident of mass cheating, leakage or mass copying were reported from any of the centres including Jaipur Centre, where the petitioner had appeared.

The petitioner has filed the rejoinder to the said reply filed by the respondent Commission, reiterating interalia that the paper leakage and cheating through bluetooth were found to have taken place at Bikaner Centre on 23/2/2014, and therefore, the entire results of the said examination had stood vitiated.

The learned counsel Mr. Vigyan Shah for the petitioner relying on the documents annexed to the petition, more particularly to the FIR dated 23/2/2014 registered at Jail Narayan Vyas Colony Thana, Bikaner vehemently submitted that the police had caught the persons red handed who were involved in the paper leakage and cheating and had registered the FIR in which it was specifically alleged that the question paper bearing Code 36 Paper II-D question series No. 36137740 was leaked out and that they had the mobile phones with the bluetooth on. According to Mr. Shah during the examination hours only, the said cheating was sought to be done through bluetooth, and therefore the entire result was required to be declared illegal. He also submitted that during the said period, the Officers of the RPSC were also found involved in the corruption and the leakage of papers in respect of the other examinations of RAS, and that the said examinations were cancelled by the RPSC. The petitioner therefore had also expected that the RPSC would cancel the result of the instant examination of the Teacher Gr. II also, however that having not been done by the respondent Commission, the present petition was filed by way of last resort. The learned counsel has relied upon the decisions of Apex Court in cases of The Bihar School Examination Board Vs. Subhas Chandra Sinha and Others, in case of B. Ramanjini and Others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, in case of Indirect Tax Practitioners Association Vs. R.K. Jain, and in case of Yashpal and Others Vs. Chandigarh Administration and Others, to submit that in case of mass leakage and cheating of the question paper, the entire selection process would be vitiated, more particularly when it is not possible to segregate those who had indulged in malpractices from those who did not.

Per contra, the learned counsel Mr. S.N. Kumawat for the respondents-RPSC submitted that the petitioner having been declared fail in the said examination has filed the present petition, at the stage when the respondent Commission is in the process of making appointments. According to him, the petitioner had appeared at the Jaipur Centre, whereas the alleged incident had taken place at Bikaner Centre and that no incident of cheating or leakage was reported at the Jaipur Centre. While conceding that the FIR in respect of the alleged incident was registered at the concerned Police Station at Bikaner, he submitted that it was an incident whereby an attempt to leak the question paper was made and that there was no allegation made against any of the candidates, who had appeared in the said examination at Bikaner. He further submitted that the charge sheet was already filed in respect of the said incident prior to filing of the present petition, and now the matter is pending with the concerned Court. According to him, none of the candidates have been found to have taken advantage of the said attempt to leak out the paper, and hence it could not be said that it was a case of mass copying or mass leakage.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, and to the documents on record, it appears that undisputedly the petitioner had appeared in the examination in question from Jaipur Centre, and the alleged incident had taken place at Bikaner Centre. It is also not disputed that the petitioner had approached the Court by way of present petition, after she having not been found successful in the said examination inasmuch as she had obtained only 93.6 marks, whereas the cut of marks for the general category-female were 327.62. The alleged incident had taken place in February, 2014, after the declaration of the result. Hence, the Court has reason to believe that the petitioner has challenged the result and selection process only because she could not succeed in the examination. If the alleged incident had taken place in February 2014, she could have approached the Court earlier if she was so concerned about the alleged illegalities and malpractices. That apart, even on merits, the present petition is found to be devoid of merits.

It is pertinent to note that the alleged incident had taken place at Bikaner in respect of which an FIR was registered on the same day, in which it was alleged interalia that during the time when the examination in question was going on, certain persons were found to be involved in trying to leak out the question paper and prepare the answer keys of the said paper with the help of computers and books and that the bluetooths of mobiles of some persons were also found on. Since the charge sheet in the said case has already been filed, it would not be proper to make any observation on the said FIR. However, even if the allegations made in the FIR are presumed to be correct, then also, there is nothing on record to suggest that any candidate appearing in the said examination was either found to be involved in the said offence or that any candidate had taken advantage of the said scam. In absence of any such evidence on record, it is difficult to hold that it was a case of mass copying and mass leakage vitiating the entire examination as sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. There can not be any disagreement with the ratio of judgments of Apex Court relied upon by Mr. Shah for the petitioner that it is permissible to cancel the entire selection process when it is found that the same is tainted to such an extent that it may not be possible to separate the innocent from the tainted ones. In case of Yashpal and Ors. vs. Chandigarh Administration and Ors. (supra), it had come on record that accused had collected huge amount for leaking the question paper and that a number of candidates were carried in a coach at Karnal so as to be dropped at the examination centre. The Apex Court therefore considering the facts of the said case, held that the leakage of the question paper had the effect of vitiating the entire selection and it was impossible to segregate those who had indulged in malpractices and those who did not. Such is not the case in the instant petition. As stated earlier, though there was an attempt made to leak out the question paper when the examination was going on, there is nothing on record of this petition to show that any candidate was involved in the said offence committed at Bikaner, or that any candidate was found to have taken advantage of the said incident. It is also pertinent to mention that except the present petitioner who has filed this petition at Jaipur, and one more petition filed at the Principal Seat at Jodhpur, no candidate out of more than 3 lakhs candidates, has come forward to challenge the examination or the result in question.

In that view of the matter, the Court does not find any merits in the present petition and the petition deserves to be dismissed. The petition is accordingly dismissed and the interim order stands vacated forthwith. By this order, the stay application and other applications, if any pending also stand dismissed.