Karna Hidakal and Others vs The Chairman, Selection Committee

Aravind Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Hanumanthareddy Sahukar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri Shivakumar Badawadagi, learned counsel appearing for respondent.

Though writ petition is listed for considering the prayer of respondent for vacating interim stay this court is of the considered view that considering the prayer for extension of interim order or considering the prayer for vacating the interim order would involve the exercise of examining the case on merits and as such by consent of learned advocates appearing for the parties this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

Sri Shivakumar Badawadagi, learned counsel appearing for respondent has also made available the original records relating to selection of security guards to North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (NWKRTC), Hubli and same has also been perused along with case papers.

Respondent-corporation called for filling up of various vacancies available in the corporation vide notification dated 01.02.2013 under which applications from eligible candidates for selection of security guards (95 Nos.) was also called for indicating thereunder the number of posts reserved for various categories. Said posts were to be filled up by Direct Recruitment. Petitioners had submitted their applications seeking appointment for the post of security guards and as such they were issued with call letters dated 04.07.2014 calling upon them to produce original documents for verification. Thereafter physical endurance test came to be conducted on various dates.

Grievance of the petitioners is that in the call letters Annexures A to A-6 issued by the respondent-corporation it has been clearly indicated that to maintain transparency and definiteness all the tests would be conducted by using Radio Frequency Identification Timing Technology (RFID), however in the physical tests conducted the said RFID method was not used or applied to conduct the tests even though it was stated so in the call letters issued to them. It is the contention of petitioners that they had successfully passed all the above tests and despite their passing in the test corporation has chosen to select the candidates according to their own choice for reasons best known. They also contend that even though petitioners are eligible and entitled for being selected to the post of security guards in the corporation, they have been deprived of their legitimate right. It is further contended that on account of non conducting of physical tests by using RFID procedure or method physical tests conducted by respondent is liable to he held as erroneous and they state that malpractices have been committed by; respondent officials to select the candidates while conducting physical endurance test. On these grounds petitioners are seeking for a direction to the respondent to conduct the physical endurance test by using RFID for selection of security guards as stated by the corporation itself in their call-letters issued to the candidates like petitioners.

Respondent-Corporation has appeared and filed its statement of objections and denied the averments made in the writ petition. They have specifically contended that post of security guard was to be filled up by conducting physical endurance test and in the notification issued by the corporation it is not indicated that RFID method would be used to conduct physical endurance test and on account of the idea of implementing RFID technology resulted in failure due to heavy rains which had caused damage to the sensors installed at the ground due to seepage of water into sensors and consequently cameras having been completely damaged and as such RFID technology was not used for conducting physical endurance test of the candidates and in place of it manual physical endurance test was conducted and as such petitioners cannot contend that list prepared by physical examination committee which was entrusted with the job for conducting such physical endurance test had recorded about petitioners having failed in the test, and they cannot be heard to contend that on account of non application of RFID process there has been favoritism or candidates have been selected as per choice of respondent-corporation. On these grounds they have sought for rejection of writ petition.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and on perusal of the records it would indicate that undisputedly the vacancy notification by respondent-corporation vide notification dated 01.02.2013 as per Annexure-R for the posts of security guards was by direct recruitment and for selection of said post physical endurance test was required to be conducted for men and women candidates under the following category:

In order to examine as to whether there was any discrepancy that had occurred while conducting above said physical endurance test this court had directed respondent-corporation to make available original records and same has been made available by Sri Shivakumar Badawadagi, learned counsel appearing for respondent-corporation and on perusal of the same it would indicate that way back on 03.12.2013 Corporation has intimated the Assistant Director, Youth Services and Sports Department, Dharwad to Depute ''District Youth Services and Sports Officer'' or his/her representative for the purposes of including their name in the Committee to be constituted for purposes of selecting security guards vide communication dated 30.12.2013. It would also indicate that by Communication dated 11.07.2014 respondent-corporation had intimated the Additional Director, Youth Services and Sports Department, Government, of Karnataka, Dharwad, requesting thereunder to depute the athletic trainers working in the said department for evaluating the candidates performance for being selected to the post of Security guards. The names indicated in the said communication namely Sriyuths Raghavendra Pai, Kairunnisa, Hasanakar and Mahadevappa-Markara have been deputed by the Sports Department to conduct the physical endurance test of candidates who had applied for the post of security guards in the respondent-corporation. It is not in dispute that these petitioners had participated in the physical endurance test conducted by the corporation. Said test was conducted by the athletic trainers deputed by Youth Services and Sports Department. This court has perused the original minutes recorded in respect of each of the candidates including the petitioners herein and same has been compared with the certificate issued to each of the petitioners as per Annexure-R-1 (8 Nos.). Perusal of the same would indicate that the details namely, the name of the applicant, application number, name of the event, time within which they have to complete the endurance test, and the time consumed by the candidates has been recorded therein. These details are expressly found in the test sheet recorded by the athletic trainers and the photo copies of the same is also available on record namely same has been appended with the statement of objections as per Annexure-R-4 which relates to both men and women candidates. The consolidated statement of the same is tabulated herein below for the purpose of convenience.

A perusal of the details recorded in the above tabular column as already noticed herein above when compared with original tests sheet recorded at the spot by the athletic trainers who had been deputed by Youth Services and Sports Department, does not leave an iota of doubt in the mind of this court about said tests having been conducted fairly and properly. It is no doubt true at one or two places test result as pointed by Sri Hanumanthareddy Sahukar has been corrected. However, it is also duly counter signed by the said athletic trainers who conducted the tests by affixing their signatures at the bottom of the page. Hence, the correctness of the same cannot be doubted.

Even otherwise non conducting of test by use of RFID method or process by itself cannot be a ground to doubt or dispute the correctness of the contents of Annexure-R-4. For instance petitioner No. 1 for completing 400 meters running race has consumed 85 seconds and the prescribed criteria for being considered to be eligible was 80 seconds. The time consumed by first petitioner has been reflected as 85 seconds in Annexure-R-1 and same timing has also been indicated in the test sheet and it is also recorded as having failed. In the column of candidate''s signature it does not contain the signature of petitioner. It is the contention of Sri Shivakumar Badawadagi, learned counsel for respondent that petitioners refused to sign on account of they having failed in the examination. Annexure-R-2 which relates to other candidates who have been duly selected i.e., about 130 candidates indicates that they have all signed and as such the contention of Sri Hanumanthareddy Sahukar, learned counsel for petitioners that this was not furnished to the petitioners cannot be accepted. As noticed herein above for petitioner No. 1 physical endurance test was conducted on 28.10.2014 and he is at Sl. No. 14 in Annexure-R-4 i.e., test sheets recorded at the spot of conducting test. The time recorded by the athletic trainers deputed by Youth Services and Sports Department would clearly indicate that to the corresponding column of first petitioner''s name the time consumed is shown as 1.25 seconds or in other words 85 seconds. Same is also reflected in Annexure-R-1. On account of first petitioner having not completed the endurance test within 80 seconds as prescribed under the notification Annexure-R he has been shown as having failed in the endurance test. Accordingly he has been intimated or in other words he has not been selected. This is so in respect of all other petitioners namely 2 to 8 who have also not affixed their signatures. As could be seen from the tabular column extracted herein above petitioners 1 to 8 have participated in the physical endurance test conducted by the officials of the Youth Services and Sports Department and have failed in the said test. In other words petitioners 1 to 8 have not completed the tests within the prescribed time.

In that view of the matter non conducting of endurance test by use of RFID method or in other words conducting of physical endurance test by recording manually by neutral party namely official from the Youth Services and Sports Department cannot be held as tainted with mala fides or for the purpose of filing up candidates of the choice of Corporation, said method came to be adopted as contended by petitioners cannot be accepted. Hence, this court does not find any merit in these petitions as such they are liable to be dismissed and accordingly they are hereby dismissed.

It requires to be noticed by this court that in Notification Annexure-R respondent-corporation has not specifically mentioned that they would be conducting physical endurance test to the candidates by adopting RFID method. However, in the call letters issued to the candidates corporation has indicated that in order to maintain transparency and definiteness all the physical endurance tests would be conducted by using RFID technology. On account of cameras installed at the venue was not being in a usable condition due to rain water having seeped, Corporation authorities have not conducted the physical endurance test by using RFID method. Henceforth they shall ensure that such tests shall be conducted by using RFID method to avoid any apprehensions seeping into the minds of the candidates to doubt the correctness of the manual tests conducted by the corporation to avoid any litigation to come up in this regard.

Copy of this order is directed to be forwarded to the Chairman, Managing Director of the Corporation to ensure that all corporations would follow henceforth the method of RFID while conducting physical endurance test.

Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Secretary, Transport Department, Government of Karnataka for ensuring that wherever physical endurance tests are to be conducted shall be by the use of RFID method.