JUDGMENT
Permod Kohli, J.
1. These four petitions were referred to Division Bench by the then Acting Chief Justice vide order dated 19.6.2006 in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu and Anr. .
2. Petitioners in these writ applications are candidates for the post of Constables in the police department from four districts of the State, namely, Hazaribagh, Koderma, Chatra and Giridih. It is useful to briefly notice the factual background leading to the filing of present writ applications. State of Jharkhand issued advertisement notice No. 01/04 published in various newspapers on 13.1.2004 inviting applications for the post of Constables for all the districts of the State. The last date of submission of the applications was fixed as 15.2.2004. The petitioners in this case applied for selection in the aforesaid four districts of the State. Petitioners belonging to four districts have given details in the writ applications about their residence etc. All the petitioners were issued admit cards and were allotted roll numbers. Under the order of Deputy Inspector General of Police (Personnel), Jharkhand. Ranchi, a notice was published in Hindustan Times in its issue dated 6.6.2004 for conduct of the physical test for the aforesaid districts and dates were fixed between 15.6.2004 to 13.8.2004. Consequently, physical tests were conducted on the dates notified. It is alleged that all the petitioners qualified the physical test. Vide memo No. 874 dated 13.10.2004 date for written test to be held for the candidates who are declared successful in the physical test was notified for different districts. Petitioners participated in the written test. A final merit/select list was published on 8.12.2004 and names of all the petitioners were in the final select list. Petitioners have given their serial numbers in the select list. In the meanwhile, a writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 1458 of 2004 was filed in the High Court of Jharkhand relating to some dispute of the qualification. This writ petition was finally disposed of on 13.3.2005. On disposal of the petition. Superintendents of Police of the districts were asked to fill up the available post of Police Constables and send them for training by 31.5.2005. The successful candidates whose names appeared in the final select list joined their respective districts except for above mentioned four districts. It is alleged that successful candidates in these districts approached the authorities and made representation for their joining. Respondent No. 2. in the meanwhile, passed an order dated 10.12.2005 cancelling the selection of the Police Constables in the above mentioned four districts. From perusal of the order, it is revealed that selection in these districts has been can-celled on account of various irregularities and a new committee comprising of five Officers was reconstituted to hold fresh selection of the candidates in the aforesaid four districts. Petitioners are aggrieved of this order and have sought its quashment in these petitions.
3. When these writ petitions were taken up by this Court on 20.4.2006 respondents were directed to file counter and produce the original file relating to cancellation of appointment and it was further directed that during the pendency of these writ petitions, if any appointment is made to the posts, in question, it shall be subject to the decision of these cases.
4. Inspector-General of Police (Personnel), Jharkhand, Ranchi has filed counter-affidavit on behalf of Director-General of Police detailing the events relating to passing of the impugned order. It is stated that in the light of the alleged irregularities in the recruitment of Constables for the Hazaribagh Range, Police Headquarters, Jharkhand, Ranchi vide its Memo No. 696/P dated 11.6.2006 requested the Secretary, Home, Government of Jharkhand to cancel the recruitment process and issue fresh advertisement for the recruitment of Constables. The Government was also informed that the Inspector-General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Zone, Bokaro has been entrusted with the inquiry into the irregularities committed during the recruitment process and for fixing the responsibility. Inspector-General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Zone, Bokaro has conducted the detailed inquiry and submitted his detailed report vide Memo No. 994/C dated 31.10.2005 wherein various irregularities have been pointed out and the responsibility has also been fixed. It has been stated that recruitment process was badly vitiated by the large scale bungling/irregularities at the behest of Shri C.P. Kiran. the then Superintendent of Police, Chatra-cum-Chairman, Constable Recruitment Committee-3. Based upon the report of the Inspector-General of Police, Home Department vide its Notification No. 106 dated 16.1.2006 and letter No. 107 dated 16.1.2006 cancelled the select list and ordered for selection process afresh of those candidates found successful in running event pursuant to the advertisement No. 1/04.
5. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties at length.
6. The main contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners is that in the inquiry conducted by the Inspector-General of Police not only irregularities have been noticed but even the beneficiaries of irregularities have been identified. It is stated that candidates in whose favour or for whose benefit the irregularities were committed having been identified, the en-lire selection process cannot be said to be vitiated and the impugned order should operate only in respect to such identified candidates and the selection for other candidates be declared legal and valid. A detailed inquiry was conducted by Inspector-General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Zone, Bokaro and submitted his detailed report dated 31.10.2005. which is Annexure-D with the writ application No. W.P. (S) No. 7236 of 2005. He has further submitted the gist of the report vide his Memo No. 854/C dated 7.5.2006. We have carefully perused the aforesaid report. It is revealed from the report that a number of candidates who applied in the above said four districts was as under:
(i) Hazaribagh – 37138
(ii) Giridih – 32669
(iii) Koderma – 09620
(iv) Chatra – 11698
7. As per the report submitted, irregularities of various natures like amendment in height, overwriting in height, amendment in educational qualifications, amendment in date of birth and interpolation of Home Guard/Sports certificates etc. were found in respect to 932 candidates in the four districts in the following manner:
(i) Hazaribagh -312
(ii) Giridih – 346
(iii) Koderma – 120
(iv) Chatra 154
Apart from above. Inquiry Officer has also reported as under:
(a) Complaints have been received from the candidates that they have been declared unsuccessful on the basis of being absent from written examination or their answer-sheet is being missing. Since no attendance sheet of the examination was maintained, it is not possible to verify the authenticity of such claims.
(b) A large number of candidates have been shown to have cleared the physical and written test who are in fact not enrolled as candidates at the time of registration.
(c) Pages of candidates’ enrolment register and master chart have been replaced. It has been noticed that name of a candidate under one roll number is different in enrolment register and master chart. In many cases blank paper was pasted in enrolment register/ master chart to cover the names of original candidates who had either abstain from physical test or failed in the physical test and names and details of other candidates entered against the same number.
8. The Inquiry Officer has even fixed the responsibility on Shri C.P. Kiran, the then Superintendent of Police, Chatra-cum- Chairman, Constable Recruitment Committee-3. The Inquiry Officer also referred to statements of various Police Officers who were allegedly pressurized by the Superintendent of Police to manipulate the records.
9. In W.P. (S) No. 1242 of 2006 out of the four petitioners names of petitioner Nos. 2, 3. 4 and 5 also figure in the inquiry report who are said to be beneficiaries of irregularities. When pursuant to the Court’s interlocutory order dated 20.4.2006 fresh process was initiated, these lour candidates were not permitted by the authorities to participate even in the fresh selection. It is accordingly contended on behalf of the petitioners that the authorities have acted arbitrarily and these petitioners are being excluded even from participating in fresh selection.
10. These cases were referred to the Division Bench in view of the judgment of Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu and Anr. . It is useful to notice the relevant observations in the aforesaid judgment which reads as under:
In addition thereto, it appears that the Special Committee has extensively scrutinized and reviewed the situation by re-evaluating the answer-sheets of all the 134 successful as well as the 184 unsuccessful candidates and ultimately found that except 31 candidates found to have been declared successful though they were not really entitled to be so declared successful and selected for appointment there was no infirmity whatsoever in the selection of the other successful candidates than the 31 identified by the Special Committee. In the light of the above and in the absence of any specific or categorical finding supported by any concrete and relevant material that widespread infirmities of an all-pervasive nature, which could be really said to have undermined the very process itself in its entirety or as a whole and it was impossible to weed out the beneficiaries of one or the other irregularities, or illegalities, if any, there was hardly any justification in law to deny appointment to the other selected candidates whose selections were not found to be, in any manner, vitiated for any one or the other reasons. Applying a unilaterally rigid and arbitrary standard to cancel the entirety of the selections despite the firm and positive information that except 31 of such selected candidates, no infirmity could be found with reference to others, is nothing but total disregard of relevancies and allowing to be carried away by irrelevancies, giving a complete go-by to contextual considerations throwing to the winds the principle of proportionality in going further than what was strictly and reasonably to meet the situation. In short, the competent authority completely misdirected itself in taking such an extreme and unreasonable decision of cancelling the entire selections. wholly unwarranted and unnecessary even on the factual situation found too, and totally in excess of the nature and gravity of what was at stake, thereby virtually rendering such decision to be irrational.
11. There is nothing in the report of the Inquiry Officer or material on record to the affect that the written test conducted is vitiated in any manner. Therefore, the irregularities that have come to light are either in the recording of the physical standards of the candidates or their date of birth and Home Guard/Sports Certificate. Inquiry Officer has identified all such persons numbering 932 in whose favour such manipulations have been made. The total number of candidates in all the districts being much large, the identified candidates constitutes only a small proportion of the total candidates. In view of the dictum of the judgment of the Apex Court noticed above, we are of the opinion that doctrine of proportionality envisaged by the Apex Court in the above referred judgment is attracted in the facts and circumstances of this case. Such of the candidates who have successfully qualified and secured places in the final merit/select list without indulging in any misconduct or being beneficiary of any manipulation cannot and should not suffer. We, therefore, allow these writ petitions with the following directions:
(a) Order impugned dated 10.12.2005 and Notification No. 106 dated 16.1.2006 cancelling the selection of the candidates for the post of Constables for districts of Hazaribagh. Koderma, Chatra and Giridih initiated pursuant to the advertisement notice No. 01/04 are hereby quashed. Memo No. 43/P dated 16.1.2006 for fresh physical and educational test is also quashed.
(b) Respondents are directed to make appointment according to select/ merit list of successful candidates declared successful in the four districts of the State namely, Hazaribagh, Koderma, Chatra and Giridih against the advertised vacancies excluding 932 candidates identified by the Inquiry Officer and found to be beneficiaries of malpractices during the selection. Let the appointments of such candidates be made within two months.
(c) Respondents are further directed to complete the inquiry/departmental proceedings against Shri C.P. Kiran, the then Superintendent of Police, Chatra-cum-Chairman, Constable Recruitment Committee-3 or any other officer involved in malpractice in the recruitment of constables, within a period of three months if not already concluded and take appropriate action in accordance with rules depending upon the outcome of the inquiry.
12. These petitions are disposed of in the above manner.
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.
13. I agree.
