UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Vs. REJESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Single Judge rendered on 30th May, 1988 in CWP No. 4291 of 1987 filed by Rajesh Kumar Verma. The decision of the learned Single Judge has been impugned mainly on the ground that in view of enforcement of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act'), the High Court had no jurisdiction to interfere in the matter.

(2.) Briefly, the background which led to the filing of the writ petition is that Rajesh Kumar Verma (hereinafter referred to as 'the writ petitioner'), had a consistently brilliant academic record. He was one of the candidates' who appeared in the competitive examination for the Central Engineering Services held by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC for the short). in Aug., 1985. According to him, he did very well in his very first attempt in the said examination and was declared to have cleared the written test. However, the other candidate from whom the writ petitioner had allegedly copied, was declared unsuccessful. Instead of receiving call for viva voce and personality test, to the utter dismay of the writ petitioner, he was served with a show cause notice (Annexure P-l) dated 28th Jan., 1986 by the UPSC in which the only imputation made against him was that he had copied out the answers to Question 5(a) and (b) from a candidate having Roll No. 10974 and sitting ahead of the writ petitioner. The stand of the writ petitioner was that is was rather he who was sitting ahead of the aforesaid candidate and thus had no chance of copying from his answer-book. Notwithstanding the fact that the writ petitioner clarified the position in regard to the sitting arrangement which negatived any possibility of his having done copying from the answer-book of another candidate, the UPSC passed an order dated 19th March, 1986 (Annexure P-3) cancelling the writ petitioner's candidature for the Engineering Services Examination 1985 and further debarring him from appearing in all the examination to be held by them for a period of ten years, with effect from 7th March, 1986. It was this order passed by the UPSC which was sought to be quashed in the writ petition.

(3.) At the stage of motion hearing of the writ petition, notice was issued to be UPSC with a direction to produce the answer-books on the basis of which the writ petitioner was held guilty of copying, but despite service none bothered to put in appearance and to controvert the allegations set out in the writ petition. Ultimately, the petition was admitted on 3rd Nov., 1987 and actual date notice was issued to the UPSC but even then no one came forward to contest the writ petitioner's claim.