Abdul Hamid Mandal And 18 Ors. vs State Of Assam And Ors.

Heard Mr. MU Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C)No.1369/2018 and Mr. J Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners in

WP(C)No.2526/2018. Also heard Mr. D Nath, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent authorities.

The advertisement dated 24.12.2014 was issued by the Chairman, State Level Police Recruitment Board for recruitment of 6748 Number of AB

Constables in the Assam Police. The breakup of the vacancy was made district wise and in respect of Dhubri district it was indicated that the

vacancy was 428.

The selection was conducted in three stages: In the first stage, physical endurance test was required to be taken by the candidates comprising of

1600 meters and 1200 meters race for the male and female candidates respectively and 100 meters and 80 metres sprint for male and female

respectively, as well as long and high jump. In respect of the candidates, who qualified the physical endurance test, a written test was held comprising

of 50 multiple choice type questions to be answered on an OMR answer sheet. Further marks were also allotted for extra-curricular activities and

special skills for 15 marks, comprising of educational qualification for 5 marks, NCC/Home Guard/Sports for 5 marks, Diploma/ Technical qualification

from ITI/Polytechnique or other recognized Institute or in Computer Application from a recognized/accredited Institute for 5 marks. The final results

were to be assessed on the basis of the marks awarded in the physical endurance test of 60 marks, the written test of 25 marks and against extra-

curricular activities for 15 marks. The total being 100 marks.

It is to be noted that the written test was initially held on 28.06.2015, but as the authorities proceeded to conduct a de novo written test in respect of

Dhubri, Barpeta, Nagaon districts and, accordingly, the written test held on 28.06.2015 was cancelled. The order of cancellation was assailed by some

of the candidates in WP(C)No.5317/2015 and other writ petitions which were dismissed by the order dated 19.04.2016. Against the order of dismissal,

an appeal being WA No.187/2016 was filed, which stood dismissed by the order dated 30.05.2016. Thereafter, an appeal was filed before the

Supreme Court which also stood dismissed.

A de novo recruitment process was held on 14.03.2017 and the written test in the process was held on 25.02.2018 at five different centres in the

Dhubri district. The present petitioners all had participated in the said selection process including the written test held on 25.02.2018.

The WP(C)No.1369/2018 has been preferred for a declaration that the written test held on 25.02.2018 in respect of Dhubri district to be null and

void. According to the petitioners, the written test was vitiated inasmuch as, many number of candidates had used unfair means through mobile phones

by means of the mobile Apps called Whatsapp, by which people sitting outside the examination hall were providing the answers to the candidates. The

said allegation is the sole ground on which the written test is sought to be declared null and void. During the pendency of WP(C)No.1369/2018, the

select list of the candidates was made available in the appropriate website over the internet. In WP(C)No.2526/2018, the said select list has been

assailed.

In the second writ petition also the ground for setting aside the select list is that unfair means were used by the candidates through Mobile Apps

called Whatsapp as indicated above. It is also stated that one of the invigilator of a particular written test centre had lodged an ejahar resulting in

Dhubri PS Case No.368/2018. It is stated that in course of the investigation of the said Police Station case, some 11 persons were found to have been

involved.

Mr. D Nath, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent authorities has produced a written instruction from the Office

of the Superintendent of Police, Dhubri. As per the said instruction, the investigation and enquiry by the State respondent authorities revealed that out

of the five examination centres, unfair means in the aforesaid manner was used in one of the centres. It is also stated that out of the 11 persons who

were found to have been involved, two of them were candidates and the others were found to be supporting the candidates from outside the

examination hall. The instruction also reveals that the written test was held in five centres i.e., 1. SP English Medium High School 2. Govt. Boys HS

School, Dhubri, 3. Girls College, Dhubri 4. Happy Convent English Medium School and 5. Junior Girls College, Dhubri. Out of the five aforesaid

centres, mobile phones were allowed only inside one of the centres i.e. Happy Convent English Medium School.

The instruction further reveals that the modus operandi followed by the persons using the unfair means was that a Whatsapp group was created by

the candidates sitting inside the examination centres and the question papers were leaked out to the people sitting outside the examination hall through

Whatapp, by typing out the same and accordingly the answers were provided and answered by them. The aforesaid modus operandi used by the

candidates indicate that only those persons who were a part of the Whatsapp group could have taken the advantage of such unfair means and the

other candidates who were either not part of the group or did not carry any mobile phone could not be a part of such act.

It is also the stand of the respondent authorities that the people who were involved using the unfair means in the aforesaid manner are all

identifiable and can be segregated. As the authorities have thoroughly investigated and enquired into the means of using unfair means through mobile

phones and the persons actually using the unfair means are identifiable and can be segregated, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the

whole of the selection process on the basis of such allegation. No further material could be produced by the petitioners beyond what are provided by

the respondent authorities as already indicated.

In such view of the matter, as the persons using unfair means can be identified and segregated, it is provided that the respondent authorities shall

re-verify the select list that has already been prepared so as to ensure that the persons who were identified to have used unfair means are in fact

deleted from the select list. The authorities shall also re-verify that the select list was prepared strictly in order of merit based on the performance of

the respective candidates.

Upon such re-verification, if necessary, the respondent authorities shall incorporate the necessary correction in the select list and pass a reasoned

order thereon. On the other hand, if upon re-verification, it is found that the select list is strictly in order of merit and no person using the unfair means

are included, the respondent authorities shall proceed with the select list and bring the same to its logical end.

In terms of the above, both the writ petitions stands disposed of.