Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Vikash vs Staff Selection Commission (Ssc) on 22 April, 2024
1
Item No.40
40 / C-4
C
O.A. No. 3726/2023
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No. 3726/2023
This the 22nd day of April, 2024
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)
Vikash Kumar Sain
Age 22 years
S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar,
R/o V.P.O. Vhatiwar, Jhunjhunu,
R/o-
Rajasthan
Sub : Appointment
Group : 'C'
Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Sachin Chauhan w
with Ms. Vaishali Sulkhlan)
Versus
1. Staff Selection Commission,
Through the Chairman,
S.S.C,
Block No-12,
No CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi -3
2. Union of India,
India
Through its Secretary,
Govt. of India,
Ministry of Personnel,
Public Grievances & Pension,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi.
3 The Secretary
Ministry of Communications & Information Technology,
Department of Posts,
DakBhawan,
Sansad Marg, New Delhi
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Jalaj Aggarwal and Ms. Leelawati Suman)
2
Item No.40
40 / C-4
C
O.A. No. 3726/2023
ORDER (ORAL)
By Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
1. With the consent of the learned counsel(s) for respective parties all these OAs relating are taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. We treat item 40 titled as Vikas V/s Staff Selection Commission (SSC) and Others - OA No. 3726/2023 as the lead case. In the present OA, the applicant is seeking the following relief:
"To quash & set aside the final result of dated 7.12.2022 in respect of applicant herein whereby the result of applicant (within 95 candidates) have been kept withheld on the grou ground of "for further scrutiny by the Commission in selection process to the post of CHSL - 2020 (Combined Higher Secondary Level Exam Exam-2020 and to further direct the respondents that result of the applicant be declared formally forthwith and applicant be given appointment to the post (LDC/JSA/PA/SA) in respective department/ministry as per merit in present selection process with all consequential benefits including seniority & promotion and pay & allowances.
Or
(ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the applicants."
2. The sum and substance of the facts and arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant have been recorded vide Order dated 01.12.2023, wherein, it was recorded as under
under:_ "The applicant is aggrieved by the non non-finalization of his candidature in terms of the result notice dated 07.12.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant points out that in the said result notice (Annexure A-1) A 1) the roll number of the applicant finds mention in 3 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 para 9 with the the heading" Further, result of the following 95 candidates has been kept withheld for further scrutiny by the Commission". Learned counsel states that it has been almost a year since then and the applicant has not heard anything about the status of his result."
resu
3. Further, vide record of proceedings dated 16.01.2024 it was recorded as under:
"We have gone through a short affidavit filed by the respondents upon the applicant's prayer for interim relief. The said affidavit makes a categorical statement that the the applicant has appeared and qualified all stages of the examination, however, the result has been withheld only on account of certain suspicion of malpractice. It has been informed that a committee has been constituted to scrutinize all such cases and the process of scrutiny is already under way and the committee is likely to submit its report 'soon'. It would be appropriate if Shri Ashish Chaudhary, Under Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, who has signed the said affidavit appears in Court to help us understanding the specific time frame in which the committee shall be submitting its report.
2. List on 19.01.2024. Learned counsel for the respondents shall ensure that Shri Chaudhary is communicated this order by the fastest means of communication."
4. Pursuant ursuant to above, a detailed order came to be passed on 19.01.2024, which records as under :-
:
"Learned Learned counsel for applicant has drawn attention to an order dated 01.12.2023 and also order dated 16.01.2024 of this Tribunal. For ready reference, we reproduce reproduce the order dated 16.01.2024, which is as under:
under:-
"We have gone through a short affidavit filed by the respondents upon the applicant's prayer for interim relief. The said affidavit makes a categorical statement that the applicant has appeared and qualifi qualified all stages of the examination, however, the result has been withheld only on account of certain 4 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 suspicion of malpractice. It has been informed that a committee has been constituted to scrutinize all such cases and the process of scrutiny is already underr way and the committee is likely to submit its report 'soon'. It would be appropriate if Shri Ashish Chaudhary, Under Secretary, Staff Selection Commission, who has signed the said affidavit appears in Court to help us understanding the specific time frame frame in which the committee shall be submitting its report.
2. List on 19.01.2024. Learned counsel for the respondents shall ensure that Shri Chaudhary is communicated this order by the fastest means of communication.".
2. Today, Mr. Ashish Chaudhary, Under Secretary who has filed short affidavit in few of the OAs has appeared in person and explained the position. He has orally submitted that though a Committee was constituted on 18.10.2023, one of the Members of the said Committee Shri U.K. Mukherjee has re retired on 31.12.2023. The Committee is yet to be constituted. The order dated 18.10.2023 is reproduced herein below:-
below:
"Subject: Constitution of Committee to examine the 95 withheld cases of Combined Higher Secondary (10+2) Level Examination, 2020 2020-regarding.
In the final result of Combined Higher Secondary Level (10+2) Examination, 2020 declared by the Commission on 07.12.2022, the result of 95 candidates has been kept withheld for further scrutiny by the Commission. The roll numbers of these 95 withheld cases are enclosed at Annexure.
2 To scrutinize these 95 withheld cases, the Commission has decided to constitute a Committee which shall give clear and specific recommendations for each case for consideration of the Commission. The Composition of the Committeee is as under :-
:
a. Sh. U.K. Mukherjee, DS (C-II, (C SSC-HQS) b. Sh. Pankaj Kumar Prabhat, US (Accounts, SSC SSC-HQS) C. Sh. Manish Mrinal, US (P&P-II (P&P Section, SSC-HQS)
3. In this connection, the CRT Section of the SSC (HQS) will look into these 95 cases(CCTV etc) etc) and submit its findings to the said Committee.5
Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023
4. The Committee will examine the data/report of the CRT Section of the said 95 candidates. For this, the Committee may take necessary assistance of CRT/EDP Section of SSC-HQs SSC HQs and M/s TCS, if required. Th The Committee will clearly indicate, in its report, the name of the candidates who are genuine and those who have indulged in suspected malpractices.
5. The Committee will submit its report within 02 weeks of the date of issue of this order.
6. This issues with the approval of the Chairman."
3. We however observe that no explanation is coming forth as to what proceedings were held by the Committee from 18.10.2023 to 31.12.2023. It is more important to note that vide the said office order dated 18.10.2023 tthere was specific direction to the Committee that they will submit the report within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of that order. Therefore, in all probabilities, the Committee ought to have submitted its report till 31.10.2023. Despite Despite said directions, even after two months, no explanation is coming forth as to why no concrete decision taken up. Even no material has been placed on record, only oral submissions has been made that since Shri U.K. Mukherjee has retired on 31.12.2023, a decision has been taken in principle to reconstitute the Committee but that too has not been done till date. An oral assurance is given by Shri Ashish Chaudhary, US that as per instruction from his superiors, the Committee will be reconstituted within one week and thereafter, within eight weeks some decision shall be taken by the Committee. However, there is no explanation coming forth that by what time the Committee is likely to submit its report as observed in the order dated 16.01.2024. An oral submissions submissions are being made that word 'soon' in short affidavit filed by him means that the Committee shall give final report within eight weeks from today. Thus a final indulgence is required from this Tribunal to give time to take appropriate steps. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, it is rather unfortunate that when the examination was held in the year 2020 and final result was declared on 07.12.2022, yet no decision has been taken till date for 95 cases wherein in results have be withheld for further further scrutiny. The action of the respondents by itself creates a doubt whether any concrete action has been taken till date. The reasonable time as suggested i.e. eight weeks is also running contrary to the office order dated 18.10.2023, when the Committee was constituted and it was directed to give its 6 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 report within two weeks. Almost four months have elapsed, no concrete action have been taken yet. The candidates whose results have been finally declared and are among-st among st the selected candidates where result have been withheld only on account of further scrutiny to be made. It is not even clear at what stage in case of these applicants a suspicion has arisen i.e. whether it is at level TIER TIER-1, TIER-2 2 and TIER-3.
TIER Learned counsel for the applicants states that the verification of the documents of the applicants furnishes a clean chit to the applicants, which is apparent from the remark 'clear case'. The Tribunal sought clarification from Mr. Ashish Chaudhary, at what stage remarks 'clear case' have been recorde recorded. He points out that it is the suspicion and malpractice on the part of applicants in Tier 1, 2 and 3 which is independent of the documents' verification process.
4. Countering the argument put forth by the Officer present in the Court, learned counsel for for applicant states that prior to documentation verification, there are three stages i.e. TIER-1, TIER TIER-22 and TIER TIER-3. It cannot be at any stage of the selection process. Even after document verification stage no suspicion can be attributed without any documentary documentary support.
5. Having heard the counsels for the parties, we observe that this is very strange on the part of the respondents who have not acted diligently despite the aforesaid examination was held in 2020 . We are in the year 2024. The results have already been declared on 07.12.2022. We have also called Shri Ashish Chaudhary, US in person to explain the word 'as soon as possible'. Taking into account the submissions of counsel for respondents as well as the counsel for applicants, we deem it fit and proper that a Committee be reconstituted and final call be taken by the respondents. Even though there is no term of reference highlighted, the Committee be re-constituted re constituted and directed to submit its report positively within four weeks from today. In the eevent, there is further delay in taking decision by the Committee and final decision by the Competent Authority, we make it clear that after expiry of six weeks from today, provisional appointments should be offered to the present applicants and others whosee results have been withheld in respect of the result dated 07.10.2022 subject to outcome of the present OAs. We also make is clear that while offering provisional appointment after six weeks, the respondents shall issue offer of appointment by incorporating incorporating clause that the appointment is subject to any further direction taken by the Competent Authority regarding the offer of appointment qua the applicants, if they are otherwise found eligible depending 7 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 upon the outcome of the decision taken by the Competen Competent authority after taking into consideration the recommendation of the Committee. The provisional appointment offer should also contain the stipulation that respondents shall be at liberty to withdraw the offer of appointment and the appointment shall be subject bject to outcome of present OA(s) at latter stage. Liberty is granted to either parties for seeking modification or directions passed by this Tribunal, if so required.
List on 08.03.2024."
3. Thereafter, on 02.04.2024, following directions came to be passed:-
"Detailed and specific directions were issued to the respondents on 19.01.2024. The specifics are as under :
The committee was to be re-constituted re constituted for scrutiny of the documents of the applicant and other candidates whose results have been withheld.
1. The committee was obliged to submit its report within a period of four weeks from the date of the order i.e. 19.01.2024.
2. In the event of delay, provisional appointment was to be offered to the applicant and others whose results have been withheld in respect ct of the result notification dated 07.10.2022.
3. The provisional appointment was to be subject to the outcome of the present OA. The said offer of provisional appointment was to incorporate two clauses that it shall be subject to any further directions of the competent authority.
While giving these specific directions, liberty was also offered to the parties to seek modification of the directions passed.
Admittedly, the directions have not been complied with, although more than ten weeks' have passed as against against the period of six weeks allowed.
8Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 Mr. Ashish Chaudhary, Under Secretary, who is an officer of the SSC and is very ably assisting the court, submits that the committee so appointed has not been able to arrive at any final decision/ conclusion and the respondents are now taking the assistanc assistance of Google through its Artificial Intelligence software for further scrutiny.
We recognize that the respondents are entitled to carry out any scrutiny which they are required to carry out. We also recognize that liberty was issued to them to determine fu further eligibility of the respondents. However, this can be absolutely no excuse or ground not to comply with the specific directions as recorded above i.e. to extend the offer of appointment "provisionally" subject to the outcome of the OA. What has prevented prevented them from doing so is inexplicable.
We are not inclined to afford any further opportunity to them that too a period of one month which has been requested for by the learned counsel for the respondents.
In view of the personal presence of the officer and his assistance to us by giving a solemn assurance that the directions contained in the order dated 19.01.2024, as recorded above, shall be fully complied with within the next three days, we allow the respondents a period of three days to ensure that dossier dossier of the applicant and other candidates whose results have been withheld for further scrutiny, are furnished to the concerned department for further issuance of the offer of appointment "provisionally", in terms of the directions of this Tribunal.
We would like to categorically state that we find it extremely strange that a period of nearly 1.5 years has lapsed and the respondents are yet to complete the scrutiny despite all the resources at their command.
List on 08.04.2024.
Process Dasti s well. "
4. to above directions, the Pursuant respondents swung into action and on 08.04.2024, the learned counsel for the respondents, on behalf of 9 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023
4. Pursunat to above, directions, the respondents swung into action and on 08.04.2024, the learned counsel for the respondents, respondents, on behalf of the SSC, informed that SSC has sent the dossier of the applicant(s) to the concerned user department for an offer of appointment, which included a letter dated 04.04.2024, and taken the same time offer of appointment in their favor pursuant to which the matter had been listed. It is reiterated by the counsel for the respondents that instructions have already been sent in respect of the in terms of the direction as contended in the order dated 19.01.2024.
5. Attention has been bee drawn that at by the respondents respondents/SSC that on 05.04.2024, (wrongly shown as 05.04.2023), aan Office Communication has been issued. For the purpose of disposal of the cases in light of relief(s) sought, we would like to reproduce the said Communication as under :-
"Subject: Combined Higher Secondary Level Examination, 2020 - Forwarding dossier (s) of selected candidate (s) for the post of LDG/DEO/PA -reg.
Sir, The result of 95 candidates was kept withheld for further scrutiny by the Commission at the time of declaration of final result of Combined Higher Secondary Level Examination, 2020 Aggrieved by withholding of their result, the candidates filed various court cases before CAT, PB, New Delhi.
2. All the court cases filed on the above stated issue were heard on 02.04.2024 and the Tribunal directed the Commission to ensure that the dossier of all the candidates whose results have been withheld for further scrutiny are furnished within a period of three days to the concerned Departments for further issuance of offer of 10 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 appointment "provisionally". The provisional appointment shall be subject to the outcome of the OA No. 2224/2023, 3803/2023, 3423/2023, 3719/2023, 3726/2023, 4044/2023, 3625/2023, 3624/2023, 3731/2023, 3724/2023, 37/2024, 4016/2023, 4058/2023, 3829/2023, 3829/2023, 535/2024, 482/2024, 3953/2023, 3626/2023 and 4045/2023. Also, the appointment shall be subject to any further direction taken by the competent authority regarding the offer of appointment qua the applicants, if they are otherwise found eligible depending depending upon the outcome of the decision taken by the Competent authority. Further, the Commission is considering filing of appeal in the instant matter.
3. However, in compliance with the CAT, PB, New Delhi Order dated 02.04.2024, the dossier(s) in respect of 2 (IWO) candidate(s) of CHSL 2020 Examination (as per list attached) of CHSL Examination 2020 qualified for the post of L.D.GAD.E.G.P.A(D Examination-2020 L.D.GAD.E.G.P.A(D-
45) in Combined Higher Secondary Level Examination, 2020 is/are sent herewith.
4. It is requested that the Appointing Appointing Authority in the User Department/Organisation may verify the following particulars/documents of the candidate comprehensively prior to issuing offer of appointment to him (1) Date of birth.
(iii) Essential Qualification as on the crucial date
(iii) Age relaxation claimed by candidate(s), if any.
(iv) SC/ST/OBC/EWS/PWD Certificate issued by the Competent Authority.
(v) In respect of OBC candidate(s), the extant guidelines regarding creamy layer status may be followed strictly
(vi) The genuineness of OBC certificate indicating Non Non-Creamy Layer status issued by the prescribed authorities need to be verified in case of OBC candidate(s) who have been selected on a provisional basis.11
Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023
(vii) The eligibility of the candidate(s) whose candidature has been dept provisional provisional for reasons other than OBC status should be verified.
(viii) Candidate's result, rank, category etc. may be verified with the result available on the Commission's website and the list enclosed.
(ix) Photo, signature, LTI and Handwriting taken on Admission Certificate (Commission's Copy) and documents obtained at different stages of Examination need to be verified with those the candidate(s) may actually submit at the time of joining the service.
(X) Photograph of the candidate captured at the time of Computer Based Examination (all Tiers/Stages), Skill Test (if applicable) and Document Verification have been provided in the candidate's dossier. These photographs may be matched with each other as well as with the candidate who is offered the appoint appointment.
(xi) In case of any suspicion in the candidature of the candidate, the same may be referred to the Commission immediately. In case, the offer of appointment has already been issued then the case may be referred to the appropriate authorities like Cen Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL).
5. In addition, pre-appointment pre appointment formalities such as Character and Antecedent Verification & Medical Examination, etc. of the candidate(s) may also be completed as per extant Rules and Regulations of the Government. The User Departments are required to initiate action for medical examination and verification of character and antecedents within 10 days of receipt of nomination letter and offer of appointment to the nominated candidates should be issued within 3 months from the date of nomination as per DOPT OM No. 39011/2/2002 39011/2/2002-Estt (B) dated 250 September 2006
6. In case where offer of appointment has been sent to the candidate(s) and the candidate(s) has sought extension of time of joining the post, the same may be considered considered in accordance with 12 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 the guidelines contained in DOPT OM No. 9/23/71 9/23/71-Estt. (D) dated 06.06.1978 and OM No. 35015/2/93-Estt 35015/2/93 Estt (D) dated 9.8.1985.
7. If any candidate declines the offer of appointment or fails to report for duty, or there is no response from him/her even after reminder(s) (through speed/registered post with acknowledgement due), the offer of appointment should formally be cancelled and the candidate may be informed accordingly. The dossier of such a candidate may thereafter be returned to the Commission after placing therein a copy each of the offer of appointment, subsequent reminder(s) and the memorandum of cancellation of the offer of appointment.
8. Offer of appointment to the candidate(s) nominated through this letter should be issued at the earliest possible so that they need not have to wait for unduly long period and also the vacancies in question are filled expeditiously. Further, in terms of DOPT OM No. 18011/2(s)/2016-Estt.
18011/2(s)/2016 Estt. (B) (1) dated 29th June, 2016, issue of offer of appointment appointment should not be withheld for want of completion of verification of character and antecedents. The appointing authorities are required to issue provisional appointment letters after obtaining attestation form and self declaration form from the candidates. However, in case of candidates appointment to candidates.
sensitive posts, guidelines issued in the DOPT OM dated 29th June 2016 may be followed. The appointment letter should clearly state that the appointment is strictly subject to the outcome of the investigation and legal proceedings.
9 Please acknowledge receipt of this letter along with specified number of Dossier(s) immediately by email/Speed Post."
6. Learned counsel for the respondents further states in view of the above at this stage nothing survives and the pprayers made in the present OA have become infructuous. It has been urged that the SSC is main contesting party who has already initiated further process by sending the dossiers to the user department(s) as per the merits.
13Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023
7. Thus,, since process of provisional provisional appoi appointment letter are under process,, it would be no longer necessary to keep the cases pending for want of report by the Committee and final decision of course would be based on the report on cases to case basis which may take some time.
8. The stand of respondents is that an inquiry has been initiated and provisional offer of appointment is being issued in compliance with the Order dated 19.01.2024.
19.01.2024. The right initiate action by or against the applicant(s) and /or similarly placed candidates be protected. We agree with said preposition. Based on the Order dated 19.01.2024, a provisional offer of appointment was subject to the outcome of the present OA. We find since the enquiry report is yet to be submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents, the veracity of the same cannot be gone into in light of prayer(s) which is independent and not a subject matter of challenge allenge in present OA(s). Since, Since, we have already directed the respondents to issue provisional offer of appointment and positive action are being undertaken by respondents , no useful purpose shall be served in keeping the OA(s) pending just to monitor the enquiry,
9. We deem fit and proper to dispose of all the OAs with the directions that provisional offer offer of appointment is made absolute, however, subject to stipulation that the same shall be subject to the outcome of the enquiry, if any, against any particular individual.
10. We also clarify that any findings qua the applicant(s) herein and the similarly situated where there any adverse finding in enquiry, the same shall always be open to challenge without prejudice to the right 14 Item No.40 40 / C-4 C O.A. No. 3726/2023 and contention of the either parties who may seek appropriate relief(s) by way of appropriate remedy at the appropriate stage.
11. In view of the above, we further direct the respondents to issue a provisional offer of appointment to all the applicants and similarly placed candidates preferably within 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order with a rider that the same shall be subject to outcome of enquiry, if any. It is expected that final decision shall be taken by the respondents authorities qua the Enquiry Report within 60 days from today. It is also made clear, in the event the enquiry found in favor of the applicant or similarly situated person(s), the said provisional offer shall culminate into issuance of the final offer of appointment within 45 days from the date of acceptance of enquir enquiry report. Further in the event,, the respondents are to take administrative/departmental administrative/departmental action based on the enquiry report, needless to say a show cause notice shall be given before passing any adverse order of cancellation of provisional offer of appointment qua any candidate. The consequential benefit(s) shall flow w on a notional basis at par with the last candidate selected in respective category. The present OA stands disposed of. Associated MA(s) also stands disposed of. No costs.
(Dr.
Dr. Chhabilendra Roul)
Roul (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
arti/