Akkash Shaikh & Anr. vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

This writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to direct the petitioner no. 2 to investigate into the complaint lodged by the petitioners against the officials of the District Panchayat and Rural Development, Murshidabad district and to initiate disciplinary proceeding against those officers who are involved in the said malpractices and illegalities committed in the selection process in terms of the notification dated 27th January, 2014 and cancel the entire selection process for the different posts in terms of the notification dated 27th January, 2014 on the ground of illegalities caused by the officials of the District Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Murshidabad district. Admittedly, both the petitioners participated in the selection process and they were unsuccessful in such selection process.

Pursuant to the notification no. 132/P/&RD dated 27th January, 2014 for the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak, Accounts Clerk and Executive Assistant of District-Murshidabad, both the petitioners submitted their applications for the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak, Accounts Clerk and Executive Assistant respectively. Both the petitioners admittedly appeared in the written test accordingly but the result of the entire selection process, according to the petitioners, was withheld by the District Level Selection Committee for the reasons best known to them. In the meantime, the petitioners came to know from one of the participants namely Mr. Biswaroop Mondal that the officer of the District Panchayat and Rural Development Department already intimated Shri Biswaroop Mondal that he has been selected for the post of Executive Assistant of the said department even before publication of entire result of different posts. Shri Mondal also confessed before the petitioners that he scored 70 marks in the said examination even prior to publication of the result of the written test for the post of Executive Assistant. They however, came to know from Shri Biswaroop Mondal that the officials of the District Panchayat and Rural Development Department were offering appointment in the different posts like Gram Panchayat Sahayak in terms of the notification dated 27th January, 2014 against illegal gratification. On 5th February, 2016 the petitioners submitted a written complaint before the Principal Secretary Department of Panchayat and Rural Development Government of West Bengal requesting him to investigate into the matter.

Learned Advocate for the petitioners also wrote a letter to that effect to the appropriate authority but the authorities did not pay any heed to that application submitted by the petitioners. In support of their contentions, the petitioners have only filed the letters addressed to the District Magistrate, Murshidabad and District Panchayat and Rural Development Officer.

The added respondent no. 6 Goutam Sarkar has also supported such case of the petitioners by filing supplementary affidavit in opposition.

The respondent no. 3 to 5 have contested the writ petition by filing affidavit in opposition wherein the respondents have categorically denied all the material allegations contained in the writ application. The specific case of the respondents, as it appears from the affidavit in opposition, is that the petitioners participated in the selection process and when they were unsuccessful in the written examination and when the successful candidates were called for viva voice for final selection, the petitioners with a mala-fide intention have filed the writ petition in order to forestall the entire selection process. The viva voice test has already been started on and from 8th August, 2016 and copy of such schedule of viva voice is annexed with the affidavit in opposition vide R1. It has been emphatically denied that no such Biswaroop Mondal had ever stated about any illegal gratification or about his result and the petitioners are duty bound to prove such fact in accordance with law by producing specific document to that effect and that there was absolutely no violation of any rules or procedures in conducting the selection process by the respondent.

It has been specifically stated that the petitioners have got no locusstandi to challenge the selection process when they themselves have participated in such selection process and thereafter, being unsuccessful in written test, they have filed this writ petition with mala-fide intention in order to forestall the entire selection process.

Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the respondents were engaged in malpractices and accordingly the entire process of selection ought to be cancelled for adopting such malpractices in matters of taking examination as well as selection of candidates by the respondents.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner further contended that the petitioners came to know from one Biswaroop Mondal that his candidature was considered by respondents on payment of illegal gratification and Shri Biswaroop Mondal had declared prior to publication of the written result about the marks obtained by him.

On that score, the selection process conducted by the respondents has to be cancelled for adopting such malpractices by the respondents.

Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents contended that both the petitioners participated in the selection process and both the petitioners were found unsuccessful in the written examination and as such they were not called for viva voice examination. It is emphatically contended that the petitioners have had no locus-standi to challenge the selection process when they themselves had participated in such selection process. It is further contended that there is/was no existence of any such Biswaroop Mondal, as has been stated by the petitioners, and the petitioners could not produce any scrap of paper about such utterings of Biswaroop Mondal or the involvement of such Biswaroop Mondal in the selection process.

In that view of this matter it is prayed on behalf of the contesting respondents that the writ petition ought to be dismissed with exemplary cost against the petitioners.

Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of added respondent no. 6 has however supported such contentions of the petitioners, that too without any documents.

It is, therefore, crystal clear from the materials on record that the petitioners could not produce any valid document in order to show that in fact they came to know from Biswaroop Mondal about any such malpractices adopted by the respondents authorities at the time of selecting the candidates in terms of the notification issued on No. 132/P/&RD dated 27th June, 2014. It would be really difficult for the Court to exercise the powers conferred upon the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India only on the basis of such frivolous allegation against the respondents and to cancel the entire selection process on the basis of such uncorroborated apprehension/allegations of the petitioners.

In a recent decision reported in AIR 2015 SC 3643(Madras Institute of Development Studies and Ors. Vs. K. Sivasubramaniyan and Ors.), relied on 2010 (12) SCC 576(Manish Kumar Shahi Vs. State of Bihar), 2013 (11) SCC 309 (Ramesh Chandra Shah and Ors. Vs. Anil Joshi and Ors.) the Hon?ble Supreme Court has specifically observed that it must be held that by having taken part in the process of selection with full knowledge that the recruitment was being made under the general rules, the respondents had waived their right to question the advertisement or the methodology adopted by the board for making selection. The proposition of law laid down by the Hon?ble Supreme Court in such decisions is that once the petitioner had participated in the selection process, the petitioners shall be prevented from challenging the said selection process.

In the case under reference the petitioners have tried to make out a case of malpractices on the ground of illegal gratification said to have been given by one Biswaroop Mondal. Save and except this unfounded allegation against the respondents, the petitioners could not produce any other material before this Court to justify that in fact the respondents were engaged in such malpractices and thereby the entire selection process ought to be cancelled. Mere allegation is not sufficient to cancel the entire selection process.

Thirdly, the petitioners never stated anything about their own candidature in the selection process and they never stated/prayed for about their own selection in the aforesaid selection process but they have simply tried to get the entire selection process cancelled on the ground that one Biswaroop Mondal had stated something against the respondents to the petitioners.

On careful consideration of the entire materials on record I find no arguable case of the petitioners in order to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The writ petition filed by the petitioners appears to be the result of frustration of the petitioners since they have not been selected in the written examination.

The writ application is thus dismissed.

No order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.