(1.) These are the six special appeals arising out of the judgment and order dated April 8, 1997 whereby the learned single Judge allowed Writ Petition No. 39772 of 1996 and five other connected writ petitions, quashed the order dated 21.10.1996 and advertisement dated 26.10.1996 impugned in the writ petitions and directed the appellants herein to declare the result of the selection held for recruitment of Constables in Railway Protection Force over Eastern Railway pursuant to advertisement No. SC 30/65/5-E (Rect.)-1995 dated 23.4.1995 within a period of two months from the date of judgment.
(2.) By impugned order dated 21.10.1996 impugned in the writ petitions, the Chief Security Commissioner. Railway Protection Force, Eastern Railway. Calcutta, had cancelled the selection process held in pursuant to advertisement dated 23.11.1995. The impugned advertisement was issued on 26.10.1996 for holding recruitment afresh. The order dated 21.10.1996 and advertisement dated 26.10.1996 were sought to be quashed, inter alia, on the grounds that the process of selection was cancelled on extraneous considerations and in colourable exercise of power. The order of cancellation, it was submitted by the petitioners, was passed without holding any enquiry whatsoever to ascertain the truth of the allegations made in the complaint and sans any material to substantiate the alleged complaints regarding the selection being vitiated on the grounds of corruption and nepotism. As regards the consequential advertisement dated 26.10.1996, it was submitted on behalf of the writ petitioners before the learned single Judge that state-wise reservations made therein and the requirements mentioned therein that the candidates must have passed their matriculation from the three States of Uttar Pradesh. Bihar and West Bengal and that they must also be domicile of these States were violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The earlier advertisement, it was submitted by the writ petitioners, did not limit the field of eligibility to the above three States. Though several points were urged before the learned single Judge but the writ petitions came to be allowed only on the ground that the order of cancellation dated 26.10.1996 was passed without any basis in that there was no iota of evidence on record to show that the competent authority had ever investigated the truth of the complaints made against the recruitment process.
(3.) We have heard Sri U.N. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri V.B. Singh, learned counsel representing the respondents. We have also perused the affidavits filed in the writ petition as well as original record produced by Shri U. N. Sharma.