CHAMAN GIRI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.(C) No.4910/2019 was filed by 20 Sub-Inspectors (General Duty) [SI(GD)] of the respondents Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), seeking (i) mandamus directing the respondents CRPF to continue the petitioners therein on the post of SI(GD), as held by them since June, 2017, in accordance with the ratio of Vikas Pratap Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh , 2013 14 SCC 494; and, (ii) impugning the notice dated 30th April, 2019 issued by the Directorate General, CRPF declaring final revised result for the post of SI(GD) through the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination [LDCE] - 2016, to the extent of excluding the names of the petitioners from the revised merit list.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.4910/2019, that (i) they joined the respondents CRPF between the years 2006 to 2012, as Constables (GD); (ii) vide Signal dated 7th September, 2016, applications from eligible Constables and Head Constables (HC) working in the respondents CRPF were invited for selection to the post of SI (GD) through LDCE-2016, for which all the petitioners applied; (iii) the LDCE-2016 written examination took place on 5th February, 2017 and in which all the petitioners appeared; (iv) the result of the LDCE-2016 written examination was declared on 8th February, 2017 and the petitioners were declared qualified in the written examination and asked to appear for the physical test; (v) in the result declared on 18th May, 2017 of LDCE-2016, all the petitioners were selected; (vi) the petitioners were directed to and joined the six months training, on 13th June, 2017 and after successful completion of training, graduated as SI(GD)s; (vii) pursuant thereto, the seniority list of SI(GD)s was updated and the seniority date of the petitioners was given therein as 30th April, 2017; (viii) the petitioners, as of 30th April, 2018, completed two years of probation; (ix) various candidates who did not clear the LDCE-2016 challenged the result of the said examination by filing W.P.(C) Nos.1900/2017, 1983/2018, 7415/2017, 8378/2018 and 8447/2018 and during the said proceedings, the respondents CRPF agreed that there had been mistakes in the examination procedure; (x) pursuant to the aforesaid, the respondents CRPF, on 20th September, 2018 issued a notification for reexamination of the results and invited objections to the answer key; (xi) on 20th September, 2018, notice for reconciliation of results was issued and wherein additionally 40 more candidates were notified to have cleared the written examination component of LDCE-2016; (xii) on 30th April, 2019, the impugned revised result of LDCE-2016 was published and in which the names of 23 candidates including the 20 petitioners were notified in Appendix-B, being the list of candidates who did not make it to the revised merit list; and, (xiii) the petitioners thus, after two years of their selection, were de-selected.

(3.) Contending, (i) prejudice to the petitioners without any fault of theirs; (ii) that they were not parties to the petitions aforesaid filed, challenging the result and were not given an opportunity of being heard; (iii) that rank is not removable without following the proper procedure; (iv) that the petitioners have successfully completed their training and have been performing their duties as SI(GD)s since the year 2017; (v) that on being downgraded before their contemporaries, they will lose their morale; (vi) that the petitioners have lost the chance of taking LDCE in subsequent years owing to having been selected in the subject examination, and relying on Vikas Pratap Singh supra, Rajesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar , 2013 4 SCC 690 and Girjesh Srivastava Vs. State of M.P. , 2010 10 SCC 707, W.P.(C) No.4910/2019 was filed.