Allahabad High Court
Dharmveer Kumar vs Union Of India And 3 Others on 16 December, 2020
Author: Ajit Kumar
Bench: Ajit Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 74 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12010 of 2020 Petitioner :- Dharmveer Kumar Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.P. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Chandra Prakash Yadav, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India.
By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 8th April, 2020 qua the cancellation of the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Constable (GD) conducted by Staff Selection Commission.
It transpires from the record that the petitioner's candidature has come to be cancelled on the ground of impersonation and earlier when the order was passed cancelling candidature of the petitioner, he had approached this Court and the said order was set aside on the ground that at least opportunity of hearing should have been afforded to the petitioner. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court petitioner has been afforded the opportunity of hearing and now the impugned order has come to be passed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order impugned on the ground that there is no evidence to substantiate the charge.
Per contra, Sri S.P. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India has argued that in an identical set of charges one candidate, namely, Pramod Dubey had approached this Court and the matter was remanded and has been examined and his candidature was also cancelled on the ground of impersonation. He filed a writ petition bearing Writ-A No.- 7714 of 2020 which has been dismissed on 13th November, 2020 by means of following order:-
"On 05.10.2020 the following order was passed:
"Sri Shashi Prakash, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Satish Kumar Rai, leaned counsel for the Union of India submits that the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) report was duly supplied to the petitioner along with the show cause notice in compliance of the order passed by this Court. The petitioner has also submitted a reply to the show cause notice. The impugned order dated 20.01.2020 has considered the reply of the petitioner in a very meticulous manner.
Faced with this, Sri Devesh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted one week's time to prepare the matter.
Put up this matter on 13.10.2020, as fresh."
Today when the matter is taken up in the revised call none appears on behalf of the petitioner to press the writ petition.
Heard Sri Shashi Prakash Singh, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Satish Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the Union of India. The candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of constable in the Civil Armed Police Force has been rejected on the foot of impersonation of candidature. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by instituting Writ-A No. 11546 of 2018 (Pramod Dubey Vs Union of India and 4 others). The writ petition was disposed of with the following directions by a judgment entered on 10.05.2018:
"In view of the said submission, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, the present petition is being disposed of with the following directions:-
(1) The respondent No.3 shall make an effort to get the CFSL report at the earliest. Soon after the receipt of the said report, a fresh show cause notice shall be served upon the petitioner, in case, there is variance in signature etc i.e. the report of CFSL goes against the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner shall be called upon to submit his explanation before any final decision is taken after receipt of the CSFL report.
(2) It would be obligatory upon the petitioner to cooperate in the proceedings to be undertaken by the respondent No.3.
(3) The final decision so taken shall be duly communicated to the petitioner.
It goes without saying that, in case, the CSFL report goes in favour of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 would be under obligation to forward its recommendation to the respondent No.2 immediately, who shall take follow up action, at the earliest.
Subject to the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of."
The impugned order has been passed in compliance of the orders dated 10.05.2018 passed by this Court. Prior to the passing of the impugned order as show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 09.07.2018 appending a copy of the CFSL report which was relied upon against the petitioner. The petitioner tendered a reply to the show cause notice on 20.12.2019. In reply to the show cause notice or in the body of the writ petition nothing has been stated to impeach the credibility of the CFSL report on which reliance was placed by the respondent authorities while passing the impugned order. Consequent to the failure of the petitioner to bring any material or pleadings in the record and impeach the credibility the authority was fully justified in placing reliance on the aforesaid report. The recital in the show cause notice that the CFSL report is appended to the show cause notice has also not been challenged. The competent authority has applied its mind while passing the order dated 20.01.2020 cancelling the selection of the petitioner. The impugned order is a speaking order. The findings of the authority addresses various issues raised by the petitioner in the reply to the show cause notice. Some of the relevant extracts of the impugned order are reproduced here under:
"In this regard, it is stated that consequent upon qualifying PST, PET, Written Examination and after declaration of final result of Constable (GD)-2015 through Staff Selection Commission, 765 candidates including the Petitioner of Bihar & Sikkim States allotted to Recruiting Agency of BSF North Bengal Frontier for issuing offer of appointment letter with directions that Photo, signature, handwriting and thumb impression be securitized by detailing a scrutiny board and genuineness of such candidates may be verified from CFSLS/NCRB as per existing procedure. That on receipt of dossiers of selected candidates from concerned RRC of CRPF, Dossiers of these candidates including Petitioner were scrutinized by a detailed Board of Officers, During Scrutiny of Dossiers by the Board of Officers, it is found that handwriting of the Petitioner taken on Admit Card during Written Examination is mismatched with Admit card of Physical and Medical Examination. Accordingly, as per instructions, dossier of the Petitioner was forwarded to Central Forensic Science Laboratory, New Delhi for verification. As per Verification report of Central Forensic Science Laboratory, New Delhi, Left Thumb Impression of the petitioner taken on Admit Card of written test is found different from Left Thumb Impressions taken during PST/PET on Candidates Statement. Accordingly, on the basis of forensic report and as per instruction on the subject, a Show Cause Notice was served to the Petitioner by proposing cancellation of his candidature for the post of Const(GD) in BSF on the basis of CFSL report i.e., difference found in thumb impressions of the Petitioner taken at admit card during the Written Examination and during PST/PET Moreover, Hon'ble High Court vide its Order dated 16/04/2018 also held that conclusion of the employer/ commission that Petitioners had impersonated if was based upon matching of the thumb impression or the photograph then it was definitely entitled to greater respect. Hence, the contention raised by the petitioner is not admitted.
In this regard it is respectfully submitted that verification of Thumb impression in respect of Petitioner was carried out as per the procedure in vogue by authorized and independent agency i.e. the CFSL, New Delhi and it does not amount to conducting the proceedings of ex-parte. Hence, contention raised by the Petitioner is not admitted being baseless."
On the foot of reasoned order and after due application of mind the competent authority found the case of impersonation against the petitioner. The conclusions of the authority are not liable to be interfered with.
No perversity in the aforesaid findings nor any procedural impropriety or violation of principles of natural justice could be made out. The impugned order does not warrant interference.
The writ petition is dismissed."
(emphasis added) He, therefore, submits that this petition is also liable to be dismissed as on the same yardsticks the order impugned has been passed inasmuch as the argument advanced by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India is that this Court cannot sit in appeal over and above the findings returned by the Administrative Committee by appreciating material evidence with regard to the charges examined by it.
In the present case after the matter was remitted and show cause was issued to the petitioner, the petitioner raised several objection and most substantial objection was dealt with under para (IX) of the impugned order as under:-
"(ix). It is settled principle of law that in case there is a variance in thumb impression along with signature or photograph mismatch then it can be safely and substantially be held that one is guilty of impersonation whereas in the present case since there is only expert report related with thumb impression and handwriting and there is no report with regard to the variance in photograph then there is no occasion to arrive to a conclusion against the applicant that he is guilty of impersonation, attention in this regard is drawn to a judgment in case of Rajesh Kumar, reported 2013 (10) ADJ 672 (Rajesh Kumar vs. Union of India & others) It is also stated that the writ petition filed by the applicant was disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 16.04.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 2813 of 2017 which in turn specifically states that in case there is some other material with the material in hand only then one can arrive to a conclusion to determine the same. In the present case only on the single material the authorities have arrived to a conclusion against the applicant which cannot be the sole reason for cancelling the selection of the applicant.
The contention of this para are not admitted. Being the matter of selection procedure formulated by the Ministry of Home Affairs and as per the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the Staff Selection Commission (SSC). In this regard, it is humbly submitted that, after receiving the dossiers of 765 provisionally selected candidates (including the petitioner) as per existing practice, a Scrutiny board was formed for scrutinizing the dossiers of all candidates before issuing offer of appointment. Out of 765, 154 candidates (including the petitioner) were found suspected cases of impersonation by Board of Officers in Left Thumb Impression, signature & handwriting of Written Examination and handwriting on Admit card of Physical and Medical Examination. Therefore, dossiers of these candidates including petitioner containing various documents and admit cards have been forwarded to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, New Delhi & Kolkata vide Frontier HQ BSF North Bengal letter No. Estt (Rectt)/ CT(GD-15)/ Suspected/ FNB/ 17/ 5500-01 dated 22.06.2017, Letter No. Estt (Rectt)/ CT(GD-15)/ Suspected/ FNB/17/6622-23 dated 08.08.2017, letter No. Estt(Rectt)/ CT(GD-15)/ Suspected/FNB/17/10728 dated 27.12.2017, letter No. Estt(Rectt)/ CT(GD-15)/Suspected /FNB/18/4511 dated 08.08.2018 & letter No. Estt(Rectt)/ CT(GD)-2015/ NBF/ 2019/6585-86 dated 21/09/2019 for comparison and verification. On thorough examination by Central Forensic Scientific Laboratory, Kolkata, the CFSL authority vide their Report No. CFSL(K)/ EE/2018/DOC/WB/ 1644/ DXC-44/ 2018 dated 15.10.2018 opined that specimen signature and handwritings of the petitioner taken on calling at this HQ as well as Admit Card of PST/ PET & Medical Examination are found difference with handwriting and signature available on Admission Certificate of Written Examination. Besides, finger print expert vide Central Forensic Scientific Laboratory, New Delhi letter No. CFSL-2019/A-851/ 9472 dated 13.12.2019 opined that Left Thumb Impression of the petitioner available on the Admission Certificate of Written Examination is different from specimen Left Thumb Impression of Dharamveer Kumar Roll No. 6202016286 marked as S-1 (specimen of LTIs of the petitioner taken on calling at this HQ). That, in this regard it is submitted that mismatch of handwritings, signatures & Left Thumb Impressions are sufficient material for cancellation of candidature of such candidate."
In my considered opinion the authority concerned has been meticulous enough in dealing with the objection and I, therefore, do not find any ground to interfere with the same.
In view of the above, I find justification in the submission of the learned Additional Solicitor General of India and also do not find any reason to take a different view from what has been taken by a co-ordinate Bench in a similar set up of facts.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed and consigned to record.
Order Date :- 16.12.2020 Atmesh