Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Gaurav Dabas vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi Through on 13 March, 2014
CENTRAL ADMINSITRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI OA 4371/2012 This the 13th day of March, 2014 Honble Mr. G.George Paracken, Member (J) Honble Mr. P.K.Basu, Member (A) Gaurav Dabas S/o Shri Dharamvir R/o Sawda, VPO Nizampur Delhi 110 081 . Applicant (By Advocate:Shri M.K.Bhardwaj) VERSUS Govt. of NCT of Delhi through 1. The Chief Secretary Govt. of NCT of Delhi Delhi Secretariat, I.P.Estate Delhi 2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board through its Secretary 3rd Floor, UTCS Building Institutional Area Vishwar Nagar Shahdara Delhi 110 032. 3. The Direction General of Prisons Govt. of NCT Delhi Tihar Jail, Delhi . Respondents. (By Advocate: Shri Amit Anand) ORDER (ORAL)
By Honble Shri G.George Paracken, The applicant is aggrieved by the impugned office order of the respondents-Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB for short) dated 27.09.2010 holding that the Boards was satisfied that there are sufficient reasons to believe that he had indulged in the misconduct of procuring impersonation. He is also aggrieved by the said order for the reason that he was debarred from appearing in any examination being conducted by the Board for next 05 (five) years. According to him, the aforesaid decision of the OA 4371/2012 DSSSB is arbitrary and discriminatory. As a result he was denied appointment to the post of Warder in the office of the Director General of Prisons, Govt. of NCT of Delhi in spite of inclusion of his name in the list of selected candidates. He has, therefore, filed this OA seeking the following reliefs and interim relief :-
Reliefs
(i) To direct the respondent to declare the applicant as selected candidate for appointment to the post of Warder in the office of DG of Prisons.
to direct the respondents to appoint the applicant to the post of Warder with all consequential benefits.
To quash and set aside the impugned order dated 27.09.2010 being illegal and arbitrary.
To allow the OA with cost.
Interim relief Pending final adjudication of the OA, it is humbly prayed that the Honble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the respondents to keep one vacancy of Warder (Prisons). It is relevant to note that the vacancies of Warder are still available with the respondents as all the vacancies as advertised have not been filled up.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the DSSSB vide its Advertisement No.01/2008 published in Employment News dated 7 13th June, 2008 notified the vacancies for the posts of Warder in the office of the Director General of Prisons under post code 13/08. After declaration of final results, the candidature of candidates whose results were kept pending was notified vide result notice no.80 dated 26.02.2010 for completion of documentations or verification. Their cases were examined by the Board and found glaring variations in their handwriting/signature/thumb impression. It was also noticed that some of the candidates, in contravention of the terms and conditions of advertisement had pasted either blurred photograph or defaced OA 4371/2012 photograph in their application forms. Thumb impressions had also been put by them in the examination related documents i.e. admit card/descriptive answer sheets in such a manner that the same could not be easily recognized. On detecting those glaring discrepancies, the Board had taken a decision to get the genuineness of all selected candidates including the candidates whose results had been kept pending for the posts of Warder under post code 13/08 examined. The Board had constituted a committee and entrusted to them the task of verification of candidature of candidates. Accordingly, the Board had called the candidates for verification of their candidature. The Committee obtained the samples of handwriting/signature/thumb impression from the candidates and examined and compared them with their respective handwriting/signature/thumb impression available with the Board. On examination and comparison, it was found that the handwriting/signature/thumb impression furnished by the Applicant to the said committee as well as the handwriting /signature/thumb impression available with the Board did not match with one another.
3. Therefore, the Board was satisfied that there are sufficient reasons to believe that he had indulged in the misconduct of procuring impersonation. The Competent Authority has, therefore, taken the decision to debar him for appearing in any examination conducted by the Board for next 05 (five) years.
4. The learned counsel for applicant submitted that when the officers who constituted the Committee were not handwriting experts, they could not opine about the genuineness of the signatures and handwriting. In this regard, he relied upon an earlier order of the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in similar case i.e. OA No.1968/2012 OA 4371/2012 Shri Vikram Singh and Ors. Vs. Chief Secretary & Ors., where it has been held as under :-
5. After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the pleadings, we are inclined to dispose of this OA by granting a period of three months to the respondents to get the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory in question and further process the case of the applicants for issuance of appointment orders to them in accordance with Rules within the said period of three months. On eventual appointment of the applicants to the post of Fire Operator, they shall be entitled to pay only from the prospective date, as they have not worked so far on the said post. Further, their seniority/pay will be governed from the date when other similarly situated persons were given on notional basis.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents filed by them, which are on record. We fully agree with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shri Vikram Singh (Supra). We, therefore, dispose of this OA by directing the respondents to refer the case of the applicant to Forensic Science Laboratory and get their expert advice in the matter. Thereafter, they shall re-consider the case of the applicant for appointment to the post of Warder in the light of opinion given by them. If the applicant succeeds in the matter, he shall be appointed notionally from the date his batch mates have been appointed, with all consequential benefits except arrears of pay. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out by the DSSSB within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
No order as to costs.
(P.K.BASU) (G.GEORGE PARACKEN) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J) uma