Ravinder Singh vs Govt. Of NCT of Delhi And Ors

S.N. Terdal, J

We have heard Mr. Anil Singal, counsel for applicant and Mr. K.M.Singh, counsel  for respondents, perused the pleadings and documents produced by both the parties.

In this OA, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

"(A) To quash and set aside the selection and appointment of the respondent No. 3 & 4 to the post of Constable (Driver) in Delhi Police Examination-2012;

(B) To declare the non-selection of the applicant in the Recruitment for the post of Constable (Driver) in Delhi Police Examination-2012 illegal and consequently direct the respondents to include the name of the applicant in the list of selected candidates and consequent appoint him to the post of Constable (Driver) in Delhi Police with all consequential benefits as per revised merit list in Delhi Police Examination-2012.

(c) To award costs in favor of the applicant and pass any order or orders which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem just & equitable in the facts & circumstances of the case."

The relevant facts of the case are that the applicant applied for the post of Constable (Driver) in Delhi Police in response to the Notification of 2012 under Ex-Serviceman category. The applicant had secured 65 marks and the minimum cut off of general Ex-Servicemen category was 66 marks as such he was not selected. Later on the unselected candidates had filed representations on the basis of correct answer given by them with respect to one of the questions and the respondents after re-evaluated the answer sheets of all the candidates and as a result of re-evaluation after assigning the correct answer to the said disputed question. On the revaluation the minimum cut off marks for the ex-servicemen category came to 67 marks and the score of the applicant came to 66 marks. The respondents no. 3 and 4 had secured before re-evaluation 67 marks and at that time the cut off marks was 66 marks as such they were selected in the earlier round. After re-evaluation the marks secured by respondents no. 3 and 4 came to 66 mark whereas as stated above the cut off mark came to 67 mark. On the basis of the re-evaluation 45 candidates who were selected earlier had to be removed from the select list. The said 45 candidates had approached the courts which ultimately went up to the Hon'ble supreme court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 13.03.2013 in Civil Appeal No. 2525-2516/2013 directed that those who were in the select list earlier, and after re-evaluation, if they are removed from the select list they shall be kept at the bottom of the list of selected candidates as per the 2nd selection list issued after re-evaluation. As per the said direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the respondents no. 3 and 4 were selected though they had secured 66 marks in the 2nd round after re-evaluation.

The relevant averments made by the respondents regarding the above facts are extracted below:

"The facts of the case in succinct are that a Notification to fill up 752 (General [UR])-299, OBC-181, SC-192 and ST-80) vacancies for the post of Constable (Drivers) in Delhi Police-2012 was given in leading Newspapers dated 30.05.2012 & Employment News dated 2-8 June, 2012 by giving due reservation to SC/ST/OBC and Ex-serviceman as per rules. The information about recruitment process for the said post was also provided on Internet through Delhi Police Website.

In response to Advertisement, candidate Ravinder Singh (hereinafter called the applicant) S/o Shri Nafe Singh R/o Village& Post Office Ladravan, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana) had applied for the said post under Gen. Ex-servicemen category. He was put through the Physical Endurance & Measurement and appeared in the written examination and also declared qualified in the Trade Test against Roll No. 808715. The applicant of OA secured 65 marks and failed to make the grade in the final merit list in his respective category as the minimum cut off marks of Gen. Servicemen category was came to 66 marks.

Later on, some unselected candidates filed representations/OAs, with regard to providing of one marks against their correct answer for conferring of award of cricketer Yugraj Singh in he discipline of sports. Accordingly, the matter was examined and decided to re-evaluate the answer sheet (OMR) of all the 1542 candidates qualified in the trade test with the correct answer and as per the re-evaluation answer sheet, 45 candidates who were selected in the previous result are now out of merit and 45 fresh candidates are now making the grade for selection. Upon this, the matter was examined at Delhi Police Headquarters and it was decided that we may select 45 fresh candidates (Annexure R/1), who are now making the grade for selection on the basis of re-evaluation of answer sheet as per the revised answer key subject to compilation of codal formalities. However, the 45 candidates (Annexure R/2) who were selected in the previous list and now out of merit cannot be ousted from Delhi Police in view of the judgment/directions passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal, No. 2525-2516/2013 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 5752-53 of 2008) in which the Hon'ble Apex Court held that "the candidate who do not make the grade after re-evaluation shall be ousted from service but shall figure at the bottom of the list of selected candidates based on the first selection in terms of the advertisement(Annexure R/3).

xxx xxx xxx

4.3 Not admitted. In the previous result, the applicant of OA secured only 65 marks and failed to make the grade in the final merit list as the minimum qualifying marks in his category was came to 66 marks. After re-evaluation of result, the applicant of OA secured 66 marks but again failed to make the grade in the Gen. Ex. Servicemen category as the minimum qualifying marks was came to 67 marks. The respondents No. 3 & 4 of the OA, namely, candidates Naresh Kumar Roll No. 802484, date of birth 10.05.76 and Ashok Kumar, Roll No. 808672, date of birth 03.03.77 respectively had secured 67 marks and selected in the final merit list in the first result as the minimum qualifying marks in their category was came to 66 marks. After re-evaluation, respondents No. 3 & 4 of the OA, had secured 66 marks and failed to make the grade in the final merit list, as the minimum qualifying marks in their category came to 67 marks. However, the respondents No. 3 & 4 of the OA, who were selected in the previous list and now out of merit cannot be ousted from Delhi Police in view of the judgment/directions passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 2525-2516/2013 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 5752-53 of 2008) in which the Hon'ble Apex Court held that "the candidate who do not make the grade after re-evaluation shall not be ousted from service but shall figure at the bottom of the list of selected candidates passed on the first selection in terms of the advertisement." (Annexure R/3). The earlier result has lost its relevancy after the re-evaluation of result, as such this OA has become infructuous and is required to be dismissed."

The counsel for the applicant vehemently and strenuously submitted that after re-evaluation the applicant had secured 66 marks and he had not been selected whereas respondents no. 3 and 4 who had secured 66 marks have been selected as such there is discrimination and the applicant should also be selected.

In view of the facts and circumstances narrated above as the respondents no. 3 and 4 were declared selected earlier and after re-evaluation, as per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to above, they were kept at the bottom of the select list prepared later and they were selected. But, however, the applicant was not selected earlier as he had secured 65 marks and cut off was 66 marks and he was not selected even after the issuance of 2 nd list after re-evaluation as they had secured 66 marks whereas the cut off was 67 marks. As such the OA is devoid of merit.

Accordingly, OA is dismissed. No order as to costs.