S GANESHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that falls for consideration in this petition is whether, a selection which is affected by gross irregularities and is made in breach of the procedure and the norms prescribed therefor can be cancelled even after those selected by any such process have been appointed against the available posts. The question arises in the context of the selection of the petitioners and their consequent appointment against the post of Assistant Sub-Inspectors, Protection Force (ASIPF)having been annulled on the basis of an enquiry into allegations of large scale bungling in the making of such selections. The petitioners have questioned the order setting aside the selection, the panel drawn on the basis of the same and the promotion orders issued in their favour. The controversy arises against the following backdrop:

(2.) THE petitioners were working in the Railway Protection Force as head Constables. A "limited Departmental Competitor" for filling up 18 vacancies in the cadre of Assistant Sub-Inspectors, was conducted by a selection Committee comprising the Senior Security Commissioner, chennai Division, the Divisional Security Commissioner, Tiruchhi Division and Assistant Security cum Technical Assistant to the Chief Security Commissioner, Chennai. In response to a notice issued by the selection Committee as many as 132 candidates submitted their willingness to appear for selection out of which 51 only turned up for the written examination. Thirty candidates eventually emerged successful to appear for viva voce out of those who have appeared in the written test. The Selection Committee based on the proceedings conducted by it prepared a list of 18 candidates who were provisionally empanelled in terms of the Chief Security Commissioner's letter dated 31st of July, 1996, including the petitioners, all of whom were sent for undergoing the promotion course. The empanelled candidates were in due course promoted to officiate as Assistant Sub-Inspectors in the pay scale of 1320-2040 although the promotions were stated to be provisional in nature. Complaints were in the meantime received by the Railway Board as also the Railway Ministry, in which serious allegations about large scale irregularities in the conduct of the examination were made. These complaints were referred to the Vigilance Department of the Southern Railway Administration for enquiry, which revealed the following:

(3.) THE Vigilance Squad also reported that the Selection Committee had overlooked the procedure and the norms prescribed for making a proper selection with the result that candidates whose name could not otherwise figure in the panel were selected while those whose names should have figured were missing from the select list. On receipt of the report from the Vigilance Squad, the Chief Security Commissioner, has by an order dated 23rd of July, 1997, annulled the selection proceedings, the panel and the promotion orders issued by him giving rise to the present writ petitions.