LexPRITPAL SINGH ETC. ETC. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B PRITPAL SINGH ETC. ETC. v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. JULY 27, 1994 [S. MOHAN, JEEVAN REDDY AND S.P. BHARUCHA, JJ.] ,j Service Law-Appobu111e11ts-Me111bers of police force-Must be selected objectively a11d fairly-Se/ectio11 of Assista11t-Sub- Inspector of C Police made by Harya11a Subordi11ate Service Selection Board-Not objective and fair-It is in public interest that selections and appointments made con- sequent thereon be quashed-Appropriate directions made-Board directed to preserve answer papers a11d tabulati011 of marks for three months after decla- ration of results. D The Haryana Subordinate Service Selection Board Issued an adver- tisement inviting applications for the appointment of Assistant Sub-In- spectors of Police in the State of Haryana. Intending candidates were informed that they would have to appear lo two written examinations of 100 marks each and, If they obtained 50% or more marks. They would be called for a physical test and an interview. Successful candidates would E have to qualify in three out of four physical tests. A total of 3963 candidates were called to appear fmr the written examinations held on 19-2-1989. The results of the examinations were declared on 11-8-1989 •. 206 candidates qualified and were called for interview. On 27-10-1989, before the result of the selection had been declared, the Board resolved to destroy the answer F books of the written examinations as there was no space to keep them lo the Board's office. The final results of the examinations were declared on 6-4-1990. Thirty nine candidates were recommended for appointment to the State Government. G Several u,nsuccessful candidates challenged the selection by filing writ petitions and alleged that members of the Board had given more marks at the interview to favorite candidates. The writ petitions were dismissed. The High Court having seen the mark sheets produced by the respondents duly signed by members of the Board, held that the submis- sion of the writ petitioners was not well founded. These appeals had been H filed againsl the Judgment of the High Court. 326 .. PRITPAL SINGH 1·. STATE OF HARYANA 327 There being very serious allegations against the constitution, procea A dure and functioning of the Board, ail i:-espondents, including those "·ho had been selected and appointed, were ordered to be duly notified. The appellants submitted that an inquiry by the C.B.I., should be ordered and the report thereof awaited for there might be other documents which the Board had not produced; that the marks sheet produced by the Board before the court could not have been the marks sheet produced by it before the High Court; that the members of the Board as presently constituted had been appointed by politicians inimical to the politicians who had appointed the Board as it was constituted at the relevant time and that the former were interested in maligning the latter so that the documents they produced could not be relied upon. Allowing the appeals, this Court B c HELD : 1.1. It is in the public interest that members of the police force should be selected objectively and fairly. In the instant case the selection of Assistant Sub Inspectors of Police made by the Haryana Sub- D ordinate Services Selection Board was not objective and fair and must quashed along with the appointments made by the State Government con- sequent thereto. (335-H, 336-A) 1.2. The answer papers of the written examinations were destroyed E even before the result of the selection had been declared. The resolution passed by the Board stated that the Board had decided to destroy the answer papers as there was no space to keep them in the Board's office. In · reply it was admitted that there was no such shortage of space. So great was the haste to destroy the answer papers that the destruction was already complete when the resolution was passed. The shortage of space could not F have been so acutely felt so suddenly and the explanation contained in the resolution did not explain or justify the tearing hurry. The explanation was, therefore, suspect. [332-G-H, 333-A] 1.3. Ordinarily, the examiners would have themselves tabulated the G marks given by them against the serial numbers or names of the candidates whose answer papers they had examined. No such tabulation had been produced by the Board. There were four written papers. The Board would have had to tabulate the marks obtained b
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.