Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Rajeshkumar Punitlal Ray vs D/O Post on 11 July, 2024
a | OA No.361/2021 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI -- ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.361/2021 . Dated this Thursday, the 11 day of July, 2024. cORAM JUSTICE SHRI M.G.SEWLIKAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) ~ SHRI RAJINDER KASHYAP, MEMBER (ADMINISTRATIVE) I. Rajesh Kumar Punit Lal Ray, Age: 28, Oce.: Unemployed, Yaduram Pur, Masti Chak, Saran, Masti Chak, Bihar 841219. _ Email Id raleshparsa0109@gmail com, Mob. 7004583517. 2. Anil Kumar S/o Bishamber, Age: 36, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o Village Nandha, P.O. Balwari, Tehsil-Rewari, District Rewari, Rewari, Haryana 123103. Email Id- Pacheriaanil@gmail. com, Mob. No. 9896919080. 3... Bhaskar Chandra Pant, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Kailash Chandra Pant, R/O. H. NO.363, R.K Puram, Séctor-1, New Delhi-110022, Mab. No. 9540864471, Email Id- pankai, panth91 @gmail.com. 4, Manoj s/o Krishan Kumar, Age: 27, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o Vill. Gulawala, Post- Hudina, Teh Narnaul, District Mohindergarh, Haryana-123001 . Email Id- mia08345 @emall.com, Mob. No. 9812206744 5. Ghanshyam Jaiswal, Age: 34, Occ.: Unemployed, . S/o Sh. Sharda Prasad Jaiswal, R/o Village Bhasahi, Post Ahirauli Bazar, Kushinagar, Uttar' Pradesh - 274402. - Email Id- ghanshyam396@gmail. com, Mobile No. 8853443300. 6. Inderjeet S/o Sh. Mukesh Kumar, Age: 27, Occ:: : Unemployed, R/o VPO-Bhurthala, Tehsil - Kosli, iO. - 11. 12. 2 , OA No.361/2021 District Rewari, Haryana-123302, Email Id- [email protected] Mobile No. 8307849896. . Kashmir Singh, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o. Sh. Balmat, -- P.O. Shimla, Tehsi[- Kalayat, Disst. Kaithal, Haryana- 136117 Email Id- [email protected] Mobile No, 9992015885. Ravi Ranjan Pushp, Age: 28, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Shashi Bhushan Singh, R/o Vill. Tajan Bigha, Post Rampur Chuaram, Arwal, Bihar-804402. Email id- [email protected] Mobile No. 9939893369. Mandeep Kumar, Age: 25, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Dharmveer, R/o Village Shoeram Nath Pura, P.O, Karota, Mahendergarh, Haryana-123021, Mob 8053525116, | Email fd- mandeepyadav1011995@gmail. com Neeraj Kumar, Age: 31, Occ: Unemployed, - S/o Sh. Gajraj Singh, R/o Village Kanti, P.O.-Kanti, Mahendragarh, Haryana-123021. Emall [email protected], Mobile No, 8683017522. Sish Pal, Age: 28, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Rohtash, R/o Village Gadania, P.O.-Bairawas, Narnaul, Haryana-123028. Email [email protected] Mobile No, 9729724891. Mahan Pal Kumar, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, ; S/o Sh. Shyam Lal, R/o Village Keharpura, P.O.- Kasumbhi, Tehsil & District Bhiwani, Haryana-127021. : Email !d- Monupoonia&[email protected] Mobile No. 9671963737. 15. 16.. . 17.- 18. 19. -- Email Id- [email protected], 3 OA No.361/2021 Navneet Singh, Age: 30, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh, Rajvir Singh, R/o VPO Bhainijattan, Tehsil Bawani Khera, District-Bhiwani, Haryana-127041. Email td- [email protected], Mobile No. 8683017582. Dharmender Yadav, Age: 30, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Sumer Singh, R/o Village Behali, Tehsil-Areli, Mahendergarh, Haryana-123021, Mob No. 9466067290, Email id- [email protected] Devender Singh, Age: 31, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Sajjan Singh, R/o VPO Kharar Alipur, Tehsil-Hisar, Haryana Pin Code-125001, Mob. No. 9992007395, Email Id- [email protected], Pardesh Bir, Age: 27, Occ:: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Om Parkash, R/o Village Dhani Shankari, PO-Pothi Mangal Khan Tehsil-Hansi, District Hisar, Haryana-125033, Mobile No. 9812922251, Email Id- [email protected]. Sushil Kumar, Age: 29, Occ:: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Amritlal Saroya, R/o Village Badhawar, Tehsil-Barwala, District Hisar, Haryana-125121. Email Id- [email protected], Mob. No. 8369410564. | Krishan Kumar, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Sube Singh, R/o Village Khatoti Kalan, Post-Hamidpur, Tehsil-Narnaul, Dist.-Mahendragarh, Haryana-123001. Email I'd- [email protected] Mobile No. 9991872822. Jagdeep Kumar, Age: 30, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Satnarayan, R/o VPO-Chhara, Tehsil-Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, Haryana-124504, Mobile No. 9034313030 f 21. 22. 23... 24, 25. 26. 4 OA No.361/2021 Sandeep S/o Sh. Om Parkash, Age: 36, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o VPO-Deroli Ahir, Tehsil-Narnaul, Dist. -Mohindergarh, Haryana-123028, Mobile No. 8053335822, Email t'd- [email protected],. Praveen Yadav, Age: 33, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Parmanand Yadav, R/o Village-Nangal, ; PO & Tehsil-Ateli, Dist.-Mahendergarh, Haryana-123021. Email Id- Batv. [email protected], Mob. 9467777507. Bhagchand Meena, Age: 30, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Batturam Meena, R/o Village-Bhaidari Meenan, Post-Allyapara, Tehsil-Baswa, District-Dausa, Bandikui, Rajasthan-303315. Email i'd- [email protected], Mobile No, 9414260687. Vikash Singh, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Prem Singh, R/o MQ-30, Jerry Chouk, Shobhapur Colony, Shobhapur Pathakheda, Madhya Pradesh-460449, Mobile No. 8770372341 Email id- [email protected], Vijay S/o Sh. Sube Singh, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o Village Badhawar, Post-Badhawar, Tehsil-Barwala District-Hisar, Haryana- 125121, Mobile No. 9992888158 Email Id- [email protected]. . Rajender Singh, Age: 25, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Satbir Singh, R/o VPO Dhana Kalan, Tehsil-Hansi, District-Hisar, Haryana-125033, Mobile No. 9996373502 Email id- [email protected]. ; Satish Kumar, Age: 37, Occ.: Unemployed, ; | S/o Sh. Dhoop Singh, R/o Town Narnaund, Tehsil-Narnaund, District-Hisar, Haryana-125039, Mobile No. 9416142390, Email |'d- [email protected]. 28. 29, 30. 31, 32. 33. 5 OA No.361/2021 Saddam Husain, Age: 29, Occ.: Unemployed, | . S/o Sh. Hanif Khan, R/o Housing Board Coiony, Balsamand, 'No, 2455, VPO-Balsamand, Hisar, Haryana-125001. Emaii Id- [email protected] Mobile No. 7876702838, , Vijay S/o Sh. Kitab Singh, Age: 31, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o House No.43/5, Renuka Nagar, Dabki Road, Dist. Akola, Maharashtra ~444002, Email I'd- chahivijay807 @gmail.com. _ Mobile No. 9896666712. Kuldeep $/o Sh. Ram Niwas, Age: 30, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o Village Budain, Post-Budain, Tehsil-Narwana, District Jind, Haryana-126115, Mob. 9729575919. Email id- kuldeepkandola205 @gmail.com Anil Kumar, Age: 32, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Ramdia, R/o Village Shimla, Post-Shimla, Tehsil-Kaithal, District Kaithal, Haryana 136117. Email |'d- [email protected] Mobile No. 9996139377. Anil Kumar, Age: 25, Occ: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Rajbir, R/o VPO-Kharenti, Tehsil-Julana, District Jind, dind, Haryana ~126102, Mobile No. §996587209, Email t'd- [email protected]. Shailendra Prasad Dubey, Age: 31, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Ram Prasad Dubey, R/o H.NO.86, Chhanapar, P.O.Vichhoor, Chhanapur, Pratapgarh, Bichhur, Uttar Pradesh-230302, Mobile No. 7786961648, Email [email protected], Jash Dev, Age: 27, Occ.: Unemployed, S/o Sh. Diwan Singh, R/o Vill. Gandra, P.O. Bhani, Tehsil Bhadra, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan-335501, Email td- [email protected], 34. 6 OA No.361/2021 Mobile No. 9602150382. Shivraj S/o Sh. Jai Singh, Age: 25, Occ.: Unemployed, R/o H.NO.248, Vill- Datal, PS. Nangal Chaudhary, P.O. Nangal Nunia, Tehsil- Narnaul, Dist.-Mahindargarh, Haryana-123023. Email Id- [email protected], Mobile No. 9729065027. = Applicants (By Advocate Shri M.A.Parab) Versus Union of India, Through the Secretary to Ministry of Posts, Communication & Information Technology, Delhi-110 011. Email Id- [email protected]. The Chief Post Master General, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai 400 001. Email ld-moc-office.gov.in: The Assistant Director, Postal Services (Recruitment) Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai 400 O01. Email come mah @indiapost.gov.in. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices Mumbai North Division, Vileparle East, Mumbai 400 057. Email I'd- [email protected]. _ - Respondents (By Advocate Shri R.R.Shetty) Order reserved on 08.02.2024 Order pronounced on 11.07.2024 7 OA No.361/2021 ORDER | Per : Shri Rajinder Kashyap, Member (J)
The applicants are aggrieved by the impugned order dated © 29.01.2021 (Annexure A-1) wherein the list of Suspicious Tainted candidates was published by the respondents and the applicants . were directed to submit their representations before final decision for treating them as. tainted candidates. The respondents vide order dated 12.03.2021 issued a list of 122 tainted candidates whose candidature was cancelled due to their mother tongue not being Marathi and despite that they had scored good marks in Marathi paper. This Original Application is filed by. 34 applicants jointly on 01.06.2021 challenging the impugned order dated | 29.01.2021 and 12.03.2021. "The following reliefs have been sought :
"8.A) Be pleased to call for record and proceedings of the communications/orders dated 29t January 2021 and 12% March 2021 and thereby verifying the legality propriety thereof be pleased to quash and set aside the same.
_ 8.B) Be pleased to direct the respondents herein to appoint the present applicants in accordance with appointment letter dated 13" April, 2016 along with consequential services benefits as well as back wages, ;8 OA No.361/2021
8.C) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to . direct the respondents to Pay compensatory cost for this Application;
8.D) Any other suitable relief to which the Applicants may be found eligible and entitled in facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice and equity. "
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.2 {The Chief Post' Master General, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai) issued a notification on 24.01.2015 inviting online applications to Fill up the post of Postman/Mail Guard for 1701 vacancies in Postal/ Railway Mail Service Division inf Maharashtra Costal Circle, | The written examination which was held on 29.03.2015. The applicants state that he obtained rank No.621 in the online result declared by the respondent No.2 and he was provisionally selected as Postman and. allotted to Mumbai North Division and snpoiniment letter dated 13.04. 2016 Was issued. The applicants state that they have accepted the offer of appointment. on. 25.04.2016. However, the respondent No.4 issued a memorandum on 26.11.2016 cancelling the entire selection process with effect from 25.11.2016. The respondents state that 9 OA No.361/2021 some of the candidates approached the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad by filing Writ Petition No.9910/2017. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad held that those persons who are not suspected to have committed any malpractices are entitled for reinstatement with all consequential and 50% back wages. The applicants State that they are entitled for protection as well as all service benefits at par with the other candidates in whose favour the above mentioned order passed by _ the Hon'ble High Court. The applicant No.1 filed Writ Petition:
No.1428/2018 before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay against | the order dated 26.11.2016 of the respondent No.4, They state that similarly placed candidates also filed Writ Petition before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad. The Hon'ble - High 'Court in its order dated 03.05.2019 allowed all the Writ Petitions and set aside the order of cancellation of the entire 'examination. A copy of order passed in Writ Petition No.12117/2016 is placed at Annexure A-11. 'The respondents state that when the matter was 'being heard by the Hon'ble High afl 10 OA No.361/2021 Court, the respondents have placed on record. the impugned letter dated 29.01.2021 giving details of candidates marked as :
suspicious /tainted candidates and such candidates are directed to submit their representation to the Assistant Post Master General (Vigilance), Office of the Chief Post Master General, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai 400 001 by 19.02.2021, Order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petitions | No.12117/2016 & Others was challenged in the Hon'ble supreme: Court and as per order dated 03.12.2020 in SLP(C) No. 29069-
- 22076/2019, the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the decision of "the Hon'ble High Court. The respondents on 29.01.2021 published | the list of tainted candidates on its Website and they were asked to submit. the Self Declaration Form to the Assistant Postmaster General (Vigilance), O/o The Chief Postmaster General, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai-400 001 within 15 days from receipt of this letter. Most of the candidates were from outside Maharashtra. In Writ Petition No.1428/2018, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court while deciding the matter on 08.02.2021 disposed of 11 OA No.361/2021 the Writ Petition of the petitioner as infructuous. However, the Hon'ble Court held that the petitioner is free to challenge the condition of knowledge of Marathi language before the appropriate forum. The applicants challenged the order of Hon'ble High Court in SLP (C) (DY) No.10950/2021 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The above mentioned SLP was dismissed on 04.05.2021. Being aggrieved by the impugned communication dated 29.01.2021 and 12.03.2021 issued by the respondent No.4, the present OAis filed. The applicant states that 'the non- Marathi candidates cleared Marathi exam with full devotion. 'Therefore, the actions of 'the respondents are arbitrary, discriminatory and unsustainable in the eyes of law. They state that the respondents have cancelled their selection on the plea that they are non-Marathi, therefore, they are less likely to succeed in Marathi examination of 10 Standard level entirely on. their own merits. They also state that the notification dated ~ 24.01.2015 did not provide criteria regarding knowledge of mother tongue to be Marathi. This is a new element introduced jinitieay:
Se A RN aus 12 OA No.361/2021 by the respondents on 29.01.2021 and based on this the entire examination has been cancelled.
3. The respondents have filed their reply on 28.09, 2021. In their reply, they have stated that conducting of the €xamination was outsourced to external company. After the examination list of selected candidates along with dossiers were sent to concerned Divisions/Units for completing pre-appointment formalities. Two instances of discrepancies reported by the units and it was decided to include into the matter and for that purpose team was, formed. The Vigilance Team completed its investigation and pointed out the irregularities, As the irregularities were pointed out before the appointment process, CPMG Maharashtra Circle issued instructions/directions on 10.06.2016. The internal investigation carried out by the respondents revealed that there is a possibility of leakage of question paper which has resulted in large number of below average and undeserving candidates getting into the merit list. On the basis of Vigilance Report, they decided to cancel the entire examination Process on 25, 11. 2016.. 13 OA No.361/2021
3(a). The respondents state that aggrieved by the decision, some selected candidates approached CAT Mumbai by filing various OAs and while others approached the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Benches at Aurangabad and Nagpur. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad vide its order dated 03.05.2019 in Writ Petition No.11217/2016, set aside the order of cancellation of the entire examination and directed the respondents to verify again, whether there are any suspicious circumstances and irregularities f case of the petitioners and if no such suspicious circumstances, irregularities or malpractices are found, the' selection of the petitioners be restored and further process be completed within two months. The respondents approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing SLP No. 22969-22976/2019. However, the said SLP was dismissed and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 03.12.2020 upheld the order dated 03.05.2019 of Hon'ble Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad. In view of the above order of the Hon'ble Supreme court, .
Committee was found to segregate 2434 selected candidates into 1 i f | 14 OA No.361/2021 tainted and non-tainted categories. The committee adopted _ following criteria for treating candidates as tainted:-
"i) To segregate the cases of suspicious impersonation during the examination, candidates whose Signature in online application form uploaded by the candidates on the examination portal, admit card issued to the candidates by the Outsourced agency, signature on the OMR Sheet and attendance sheet obtained during the examination and attestation --
form filled by the candidates for pre-appointment activities grossly differ, will be marked as tainted after confirmation from CFSL.
To detect the case of impersonation, the cases where photographs of: the candidates uploaded on the online examination portal, admit card issued by the Outsourced agency and photographs affixed on the attestation form 'during pre-appointment activities grossly differ, will be marked as tainted after confirmation from CFSL.
iii) The candidates of other States will be asked to submit undertaking in a prescribed format whether their mother tongue is Marathi. Those candidates | with Marathi as mother tongue may be treated as non-tainted as observed in Para 46 of judgment dated 03.05.2019 by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. Remaining candidates from other States, being successful in examination paper of Marathi will be treated as tainted.
Based on the report of the Committee, out of 2434 selected candidates, total 1874 candidates were treated as non-tainted and 229 candidates were treated as Suspicious / tainted vide letter dated 29.01.2021.
45 0 , OA No.361/2021Tainted candidates were requested to submit their . representation by 19.02.2021."
-3(b). After submitting declaration by the candidates whose mother tongue was not Marathi, their candidature was cancelled on 12.03.2021. Writ Petition No.1428/2018 filed by applicant No.1 which was decided by Hon'ble High Court Bombay on "08.02.2021 as. infructuous. However, the Hon'ble High Court | mentioned in the above order that the petitioner is free to challenge the condition of knowledge of Marathi language in the letter dated 29.01.2021 before appropriate Court. The applicant no. 1 filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was dismissed on 04.05.2021.
3(c). Issuance of admit card, date of declaration of online result etc., are normal procedure of pre-appointment. formalities followed by the respondents, Therefore, the communications sent to applicants could not be construed as appointment letter. They state that the above-mentioned examination was cancelled due to various regularities observed in the conduct of the examinations by the outsourced agency against whose police 16 OA No.361/2021 complaints has also been filed. The respondents state that it was decided by the committee that the candidates of other States will be asked to submit undertaking in a prescribed format whether their mother tongue is Marathi. Those candidates with Marathi as mother tongue may be treated as non-tainted as observed in Para 46 of judgment dated 03.05.2019 by Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. Since, the applicants belong to other state (other than Maharashtra}, they were requested to submit declaration in prescribed format. Since the applicants marked as suspicious tainted, they have been provided opportunity to represent and submit declaration about their - | mother tongue. All the applicants submitted their declaration about mother tongue as 'Not Marathi except applicant No.22 (Shri Bhagchand Meena) who has not | responded. to any communication.
3{d). They contend that the selection process is made according to directions given by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad vide order dated 03.05.2019 in Writ Petitions.
17 ; OA No.361/2021No.12117/2016 & Others which was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 22969-22976/2019 in its order dated 03.12.2020 and accordingly verification process was undertaken by the department. The applicants were found as suspicious tainted candidates as per the criteria fixed for segregation of the candidates during the verification process by the committee.
Accordingly, their candidature was rejected.
3(e). The applicants belong to other state having mother tongue other than Marathi. It is evident that Marathi is fairly developed and modern language and it is not possible for candidate who has never studied Marathi or has no exposure to Marathi by way of Marathi being his/her mother tongue, are likely to succeed in Marathi Examination of X Standard level entirely on his own efforts, indicates adoption of malpractices in such cases. Hence, | these candidates have been treated as tainted. They further submit that the averment of the applicants is not correct. The applicants who belong to other state are marked as suspicious tainted in the light of observations made in para 46 of the 18 OA No.361/2024 Judgment dated 03.05.2019 of the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petitions No.12117/2016.
4. The applicants have filed their rejoinder on 29.10.2021 wherein it has been stated that dué to malpractices and irregularities in the recruitment process of Postman/Mail Guard, F.1.R. was registered on 04.08.2017 bearing No.190/2017 at M.R.A, Marg Police Station, Mumbai. They state that after investigation and enquiry, Investigating Officer filed final report was submitted under Section 173. of Criminal Procedure Code in 47% Metropolitan Magistrate Court, at Esplanade, Mumbai on 07.08.2021 and it was revealed that there was no- malpractice or any irregularities during the examination of post Department for Postman/Mail Guard in the Postal Department.
4(a). They state that the criteria adopted for treating candidates as tainted by respondents is not proper and same was rejected by the Hon'ble High Court at Bombay Aurangabad Bench and by Hon'ble Supreme Court. On the issue of applicants scoring in the 19 OA No.361/2021 Departmental Examination as compared to their academic performance SSC and inability of some non-Marathi candidates to understand Marathi though they had scored well in Marathi Examination conducted by the Department. Reliance was placed on the judgment dated 03.05.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No.12117 of 2016 which is reproduce below:
nas We find that, the Vigilance Team wrongly shown the candidates securing above 60% marks in recruitment exam in Maths, English: and Marathi as tainted candidates if their marks in SSC were below 50%. In SSC, the candidates are immature. Thereafter they "might have graduated, realized the importance of jobs and might-have taken coaching and after long gap they must have appeared for recruitment exam We feel that, the increase in marks below 25% cannot be treated -at suspicious. The marks of candidates cannot be as per the marks in SSC otherwise there was no purpose in holding the recruitment examination. The candidates could have . selected on the basis of marks in SSC. In Anmednagar District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra, (Writ Petition No. 8811 of 2018, to which one of S. V. Gangapurwala, J. was party), 'decided on 08.04.2019, this Court has held that the _ persons not scoring good marks in academics can secure good marks in recruitment. We feel that, the Vigilance Team instead of trying to identify and segregate the tainted candidates included the above | 20 OA No.361/2021 referred candidates as tainted to increase the tainted candidates and justify the cancellation of the whole examination.
46. We find that, the figures given by the Vigilance Team as referred in the chart are very low as compared to the number of candidates appearing and number of candidates successful. The Vigilance Team has shown higher figure of 111-18 of candidates securing high marks in Marathi when the Marathi was not the subject in SSC but this figure includes the candidates having mother-tongue Marathi and appearing for SSC from other State. These figures should have been excluded. The candidate having mother tongue Marathi can score well even if it is not a subject for him at SSC level."
A{b). It is submitted that on non-Maharashtrian candidates scored better marks than Maharashtrians candidates on this aspect as per the common judgment dated 03.05.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in W.P. No. 12117 of 2016, which is reproduce below:
"53. Similarly, the vigilance committee reported that 102 candidates from other States have been successful.
We find that, it is not a suspicious circumstance. Large number of people from the other states get attracted to this State for employment and business and they settle here. If the candidates are from other States this fact by itself cannot be a ground 'of suspicion. it is reported that, 18 candidates have 2i0 OA No.361/2021 secured more than 60% marks in recruitment, when their record was poor in SSC. These candidates can be identified and segregated and existence of such small number of candidates cannot be considered as a sample of mass copying and mass leakage, A(c). Applicants state that it is the part of knowledge that a person can speak very well Marathi by learning, but not necessary. that their mother tongue shall be Marathi. Many Indians having an excellent knowledge of English but it is not necessary that their Mother Tongue will be English. Therefore the action of the respondents proved a4 famous Stockish Proverb "Give the Dog Bad Name and Hang Him". The applicant raised the issue before this Hon'ble Court that the order passed to declare Marathi as Mother Tongue'is illegal and such imposing condition was not imposed in the Notification on which the applicant is selected and then the question comes how it can be effective retrospectively. The second question comes. in similar situated person who are selected and appointed, they are continuing in job. The other points the direction by the Hon'ble Court is to enquiry into facts related to taint not for declaring category in category. The direction is made to declare tainted and not tainted. Theré is no i 22 OA No.361/2024 such record to show that the applicants are tainted because there is NO any report to show that the applicant are tainted and at last the trick is adopted by taking declaration as their Mother Tongue as Marathi which is not possible except the person born and grown in Maharashtra and the person who have come from other _ States either for business or working for several years and their children grown their even then they cannot declare their mother tongue however it would be relevant to mention here that the Hon'bie High Court at Aurangabad has taken this view in their judgment dated 02.08.2017.
4(d). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment dated 17.10.2014 in case of State of U.P & Ors Vs. Arvind Kumar Shrivastava & Ors, CA No.9849/2014 enumerated the legal principles for dealing with the request made. by similarly placed persons in the following terms. The legal principle which emerges from the reading of the aforesaid judgments cited both by the applicants as well as the respondents, can be summed up as under:23 : OA No.361/2021
"(1). Normal rule is that when a particular set of employees to given relief by the Court, all other
- identically situated persons need to be treated alike by extending that benefit. Not doing so would amount to.
discrimination and would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of india. This principle needs to be applied in service. matters more emphatically as the service' jurisprudence evolved by this from time to time postulates that all similarly situated persons should be treated similarly. Therefore, the normal rule would be that merely because other similarly situated persons did not approach in the Court earlier. They are not to be treated differently." .
"Afe). The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in: Mohd. Hanit Quareshi and Ors. Vs. State of: Bihar, AIR 1958 SC 731 and subsequently followed in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rakesh Kohli and Anr., | (2012) 6 SCC 312 that "while dealing with the meaning and scope of Article 14 and to pass the tests of permissible classification, two conditions must be fulfilled, namely, (i) the classification mist be' founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group, and (ii) such differentia must have rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question", :24 OA No.361/2021
4(f). The Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Joginder Pal'Singh | and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, (2014) 6 SCC 644 has passed clear direction that where there is possible of making exercise of segregation from tainted to untainted must be done. The respondent did not make any exercise of segregating and cancelled the examination in' whimsical manner. But do not produce: even a single document in respect any illegality committed the applicants. The favour of cause and consequence of impugned order is depriving the service of applicant. The respondent did not comply with the direction passed in SLP No.8642- 8644 of 7017 titled as Monu Tomur and Sidharth Yadav - . and Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors decided on 28.03.2018. The 'respondent did complied direction passed in Hon'ble High Court. Bombay Bench at Aurangabad vide DB Civil: Writ Petition: No.12117/2016 titled as Prakash g Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors, vide order dated 03.05.2019. It js submitted that one must be mindful to the fact that on a populous country like India, where job opportunities are few and spare, public employment is much 25 > OANo.361/2021 coveted for the youth. Denial of opportunity to get the job after fulfillment of all necessary éxaminations and scrutiny, on vague and wild suspicion must be construed as arbitrary action. It is legitimate expectation of the candidates to get appointment when | - they are selected through a duly organized competition system. it . would be most unfair decision to force such selected candidates to. face examination once again for same post. Somerset Maughm the great writer has rightly said "how little it takes to make or © wreck us."
A(g). ' is admitted to the extent that the direction is issued but it has not been given any direction to take declaration of Mother Tongue Marathi, however the aforesaid para has been explained in this respect and the same is reiterated, The respondent come on conclusion on investigation but neither the result nor the investigation report is given. The respondents clearly say (a) that 7 the attestation form filled by the candidates for pre-appointment | activities grossly differ, will be marked as tainted after confirmation from CFSL, but the respondent without coming the 26 OA No,361/2021 result of rst declared tainted which is nothing but glaring example of arbitrariness and colorful exercise of power. No any such instruction is given by Hon'ble High Court at Aurangabad vide DB Civil Writ Petition No.12117/2016 titled as Prakash & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors, vide order dated 03.05,2019 in respect of taking declaration of Mother Tongue for the candidates of other States. It has bean observed at para 46 that the candidate having 'mother tongue Marathi can score well even if itis not 3 subject for | him at SSC level. So, there is comparison for obtaining marks for candidate of Mother tongue Marathi and Marathi ; subject in Marathi. The Hon'ble High Court at Aurangabad in the same judgment at Para 53 states similarly, the vigilance committee reported that 102 candidates from other States have been successful, We find that, it is not a suspicious circumstance. Large number of people from the other states gets attracted to this State for employment and business and they settle here. If the candidates are from other States this fact by itself cannot be a ground of suspicion. It is reported that, 18 candidates have 27 OA No.361/2021 secured more than 60% marks in recruitment, when their record was poor in SSC. These candidates can be' identified and segregated and existence of such small number of candidates cannot be considered as a sample of mass copying and mass leakage. -
a(h). The respondent did not disclose how the applicant has been declared tainted and what was the criteria for declaring him tainted. It is pertinent to mention here that the Hon'ble High Court at Aurangabad has passed clear direction that it cannot be base for declaring tainted for those persons who have come from other. States for either t to work and for the purpose of business and. settled there. ft has also clarified in such circumstance they cannot be declared as tainted which is evident at para 53 of judgment dated 03.05.2019. tis submitted by the applicant that the respondent did not comply the direction for segregation of candidate in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble High Court at Aurangabad dated 03.05.2019. 'It would be also relevant to mention here that the respondent did not comply the direction of .
28 - OA No.361/2621Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of Monu Tomur (supra) where there is not uttered any single word in respect of Marathi Mother Tongue. The respondent did not comply deliberately and intentionally the direction passed in the case of Joginder Pal Singh and others Vs State of Punjab and others (2014) 6 SCC 644 has passed clear direction that where there is possible of making exercise of segregation from tainted to untainted must be done.
4(i}). There is no any specific rule or regulation and any notification whereby it is mandatory that the selection for Postman/Mail Guard, must have mother tongue Marathi The Recruitment Rule for Pastman also does not say anything -about | mandatory provision of having mother tongue Marathi for selection of Postman and Mail Guard. The notification issued for selection also does not reveal mandatory provision of having mother tongue Marathi. The new Notification cannot be effective retrospectively and also without withdrawing the previous one, ft is submitted that it is the violation of the mandate of the Constitution of India because a person cannot be deprived for 29 OA No.361/2024 employment in the garb of imposing additional condition in respect of any language which has not been said anything in the notification for selection.
Ali). lt is further necessary to note that as per the final report dated 07.08.2021 filed by E.O.W. after investigation and enquiry, - by investigating officer in F.I.R. No.59 of 2017, stated its details - report at serial Nos.5.6 to 5.6.12 against those candidates whose mother tongue is non-Marathi, not scoring good. marks in academics SSC can secure good marks in recruitment examination by -. studying, after getting matured, reading competitive examination books which are available in market and with help of coaching classes. We further say that as per the Final report dated 07.08.2021 of E.O.W. Mumbai it's reveled that there was no any malpractice and irregularities in the recruitment process, hence this present OA may be allowed.
. 5. 7 The sur-rejoinder has been filed by the respondents on 11.01.2022, wherein, they have repeated most of the portions earlier stated in their reply. The respondents have. stated that the:
i 1 i j '© 30 OA No.361/2022 | matter was reported to the Police and FIR was lodged against the Outsourcing Agency i.e. Manipal Technologies Limited vide No. 190/17 dated 4.8.2017 at M.R.A. Marg Police Station, Mumbai-400 001 through EOW. Police Authorities has now submitted 'C' Summary report before Hon' ble Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ayn Court Fort, Mumbai. Since, the Police Investigation Report is pending for hearing against the conclusion made by the investigation officer in the Police Report.
5(a}. The applicants reproduced Para 45 and 46-of Judgment dated 03.05.2019 by Hon'ble High Court, of Judicature Bombay Bench at Aurahgabad. In the light of para 4G of Judgment dated 03.05.2019, the candidates of other States were asked to submit undertaking in a prescribed format whether their mother tongue is Marathi to provide reasonable opportunity to such candidates having mother tongue as 'Marathi', Applicants also reproduced Para 53 and 35 of Judgment dated 03.05.2019 by Hon'ble High Court, of Judicature Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. In the fight of para 46 of Judgment dated 03.05.2019, the candidates of other 34 OA No.361/2021 States were asked to submit undertaking in.a prescribed format whether their mother tongue is Marathi to treat these candidates as non-tainted.
5(b). They submit that in the light of Judgment of High Court:
dated 03.05.2019, the exercise for verification of records and _ Segregation of suspicious / tainted candidates from 2434 selected candidates was carried out by the Department. In the light of para 46 of Judgment dated 03.05.2019, the candidates of other States were asked to o submit undertaking i in a prescribed format whether their mother tongue is "Marathi" to treat these candidates as non-
tainted. Accordingly, seif-declaration was called for from all the suspicious / tainted candidates who belong to other state to provide a reasonable opportunity to the candidates having mother . tongue Marathi. It is known that Marathi is a developed and modern language. Hence, it s not possible for a candidate who | "have never studied Marathi during his/her education or has had no exposure to J the Marathi onguage Py way of Marathi being his/her mother tongue to succeed in "Marathi Examination of x 32 OA No.361/2024 Standard level entirely by his/her own efforts. A 'candidate with no exposure to Marathi language, except "Devnagari Script" is not expected to perform wel in the paper as opposed to candidates who have studied Marathi as a medium of education or as a language in curriculum or exposed to the language Marathi by way mother tongue.
5{c). The respondents submit . that | the action to obtain declaration from the candidates based from other states was based on observation made under para no 46 of Judgment dated 03.05.2019 of Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad which is reproduced below:
"The figures given by the Vigilance Team as referred in the chart are very low as compared to the number of candidates appearing and number of- candidates successful. The Vigilance Team has shown higher figure _ Of 111-18 of candidates securing high marks in Marathi when Marathi was not a subject' in SSc from other 'state, These figures should have been excluded to | candidates having mother tongue Marathi can score well even if it is nota subject for him at ssc level."
Accordingly, self-declaration was called for from all the suspicious/ tainted . candidates who belong to other state to provide a 33 _ OA No.361/2021 'reasonable opportunity to the candidates having mother tongue Marathi.
5(d). The respondents submit that there is no new notification about Marathi being 'mother tongue as contended by the petitioner. However, the action to obtain declaration from the candidates from other states was based on. observation made under para no 46 of Judgment dated 03.05.2019 of Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. Self- declaration was called for from all the suspicious/ tainted sandidates who belong to other state to. provide a reasonable opportunity to the candidates having mother tongue "Marathi." The averment of the applicant is not correct. Hon'ble High Court.of © Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Judgment dated 03.05.2019, directed to verify again, whether there are any suspicious circumstances 'and irregularities in case of the petitioners herein and if: no such suspicious circumstances, irregularities or malpractices are found as discussed in the judgment, the selection of the petitioners be restored 'and further 'process shall be } 3 io | 34 OA No.361/2021 completed within a period of two months. Accordingly, a "Committee was constituted for verification of records to segregate all 2434 selected candidates into 'tainted and non-tainted category. Out of all 2434 selected candidates of Postman/ Mail guard and MTS Examination 2015, total 1874 candidates were treated as "non-tainted" vide letter dated 71.01.2021 and allotted to respective Divisions for completion of pre-appointment formalities by restoring their selection.
5(e). They submit that the department has followed directions of Hon'ble. Court. The Hon'ble High Court in judgment .dated. 03.05.2019, directed to verify again, whether there are any suspicious circumstances and irregularities in case of the - petitioners herein and if no such Suspicious circumstances, irregularities or malpractices are found as discussed in: the judgment, the selection of the petitioners be restored and further | process shall be completed within a period of two months. Cancellation of the entire examination was set aside by Hon'ble Court to the extent of the petitioners in WP No. 12117 of 2016 35 OA No.361/2021 and directed to verify again whether there are any suspicious circumstances. and irregularities in case of petitioners, Respondents decided and constituted a committee for verification of records to segregate all 2434 selected candidates into tainted and non-tainted category. In fact, verification was undertaken for al selected candidates ireespective of petitioners in. WP No. 12117 of 2016. Out of 2434 selected candidates of Postman/ Mailguard and MTS Examination 2015, total 1874 candidates were treated as non tainted 'Vide letter dated 21.01.2021 and allotted -to respective Divisions for completion of ore-appointment formalities | by restoring their selection. Out of 1874 non tainted candidates, appointments of 342 non tainted candidates have been restored with 50% back-wages by implementing Judgment dated | 03.05.2019 in true spirit, _-- os 5(f). They again submit that the Notification for said examination . was issued on-24.01.2015 as per the Recruitment Rules applicable. at that time. The department has not imposed additional condition in respect of any language as contented - by the a gletrige., a a ion Sy 36 OA No.361/2021 petitioner. Hence, Department has provided reasonable Opportunity to the Suspicious/tainted candidates from other states in the light of observations made by Hon'ble High court under Para No. 46 j in the Judgment dated 03.05.2019.
5(g). All the candidates marked: as suspicious / tainted were requested to submit their representation by 19.02.2021 as well as candidates from other state were requested to submit declaration In prescribed format by 19.02.2021, whether their mother tongue is Marathi. Accordingly, 122 candidates have been declared as tainted candidates who have declared their mother tongue as "not Marathi" on 12.03.2021 and 47 candidates on 04.06.2021 and | their candidature was cancelled. tis pertinent to mention that the order of cancellation of the entire examination was set aside by Hon' ble Court to the extent of the petitioners in WP No. 12117 of 2016 and directed to verify again whether there are any suspicious circumstances and irregularities in case of petitioners. However,. Department decided and constituted a committee for verification of records to segregate all 2434 selected candidates into tainted 37, - . OANO.361/2021 and non-tainted category. In fact, verification was undertaken for all selected candidates irrespective of petitioners in WP No. 12117 of 2016. Accordingly, selection of 1877 non tainted candidates has been restored out of 2434 candidates till date.
6. Heard the learned counsels for the parties at length and also perused the pleadings and documents available on record. Judgments cited by the applicants in their rejoinder does not have any direct effect on the controversy involved in the presént case as facts and circumstancés in these cases were different.
7. lt is seen that' the respondents have invited online application for filling up the vacancies in Postal/Railway Mail Service in Maharashtra Circle. The candidates were instructed to submit their application online. Detailed instruction on various questions was provided through a link placed with 'their | notification in form of. 'Frequently Asked Question', It. was mentioned in the advertisement that the Department has right to' cancel the recruitment process or modify the selection process with the reasons recorded in the writing at any stage. Detailed i | 38 OA No.361/2021 instructions on the examination were given in para 2 of important information in the Notification dated 24.01.2015, [t was stated . that mere registration of online application -or appearing or qualifying in the test does not confer any right for selection/appointment.
8. The controversy in this Original Application relates to the issue that all the applicants in this Original Application are from outside Maharashtra and the respondents while preparing a list of tainted - candidates have put them on the said fist despite qualifying the examination including Marathi language portion. The said list of 34 candidates is marked as Exhibit 3 in the reply of the respondents dated 28.09.2021. ft may be mentioned that the examination for the above-mentioned vacancy contained a number of questions which are required to test the knowledge of Marathi Language. The above applicants have secured the marks and their claim is that they qualify for appointment for the relevant post. However, the respondents have taken a stand that.
' their mother tongue is not Marathi. The respondents state that 39 OA No.361/2021 Marathi is fairly developed and modern language and it is not possible for candidate who has never studied Marathi or has no exposure to Marathi by way of Marathi being his/her mother tongue is likely to succeed in Marathi Examination of X Standard | level entirely on his own efforts. This indicates adoption of malpractices in such cases,
9. . The respondents accordingly evolved criteria and decided that the candidates of other States will be asked to submit undertaking ina prescribed format whether their mother tongue. is Marathi. Those candidates with Marathi language as a mother tongue were treated as non-tainted. This was also observed in para 46 of the judgment dated 03.05.2019 of Hon'ble High Court _of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. It may be seen that knowledge | of Marathi Language is an essential criteria and has beén incorporated in the question paper itself, no separate notification is required on this point. Therefore, the plea of the applicants that . the respondents have evolved fresh criteria of knowing Marathi which. was not part and parcel of the examination does not hold i i ! 40 OA No.361/2021 much ground as the examination paper itself contains considerable questions on Marathi language. Further, the portion containing "Frequently Asked Questions" makes it clear on the pattern of question paper and gives details of marks kept for Marathi portion of the paper. The respondents are responsible for selecting the meritorious and fittest person after following due process. However, in the examination, malpractices have been noticed.
10. it is also a fact that a number of complaints / irregularities were reported by the Units Head while processing the cases of appointment. of selected candidates which later on resulted into cancellation of this examination. Under the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad Bench, the respondents had made efforts to salvage the examination by doing extensive exercise to arrive at conclusion on tainted/non- tainted candidates and-a large number of candidates who were declared successful and untainted have been given appointment.
lt is no doubt true that simply because the candidates whose Al OA No.361/2021 mother tongue is not Marathi cannot score good marks. In the 7 case of Prakash S/o Bhagaji Wani (supra) it has been held that:
"45. We find that, the Vigilance Team wrongly shown the candidates securing above 60% marks in recruitment exam in Maths, English and Marathi as tainted candidates if their marks in. SSC were below 50%. in SSC, the candidates are immature. Thereafter they might have ~ graduated, realized the importance .of jobs and might have taken coaching and after long gap they must have appeared for recruitment exam."
- In this backdrop, it was for the applicant to explain in their OA as to how they acquired knowledge of Marathi. The candidates who - are not domicile of the Maharashtra and whose mother tongue is not Marathi could not bring out in their OA as to how they have learnt Marathi and acquired knowledge of reading and writing of Marathi language to attain proficiency in the language. _It.is seen that most of the applicants are neither domicile ofthe Maharashtra nor they have worked or lived for considerable | 'period in the State of Maharashtra where they could have got an opportunity to acquire proficiency jin Marathi Language.
Therefore, doubts of respondents about use of unfair practice | ! j 4 42 . OA No.361/2021 during the course of examination by the candidates while answering questions asked in the question paper cannot be ruled out altogether.
11. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed. MA, if any pending, stands closed. No order as to costs.
(Rajinder Kashyap) (JusticeIM.G. Sewlikar} Member (A) Member (J) kmg*