Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The facts leading to filing of the captioned OA No.3902/2023 are that the respondent N0.3 issued Advertisement Nos.03/17 and 01/15 for recruitment on various posts, including the posts of Warder as well as Asstt. Superintendent in Delhi Prison Department (Annexure A-2 (Colly). The applicants, who were fulfilling all the eligibility conditions, as prescribed in the said Advertisement(s), have applied for the said post(s) for participation in the said recruitment process. After examining the eligibility of the applicants, the respondents have issued Admit Cards to the applicants to appear in Physical test. While permitting for physical test, the applicants were made to hold their postcard size photo as well as Admit Card in their hand for photography as well as videography, which was done by the respondents. In addition, the applicants were made to give thumb impression, undertaking/sample hand writing and biometric was also done. After conducting aforesaid verification process, the applicants were subjected to physical test and they all were declared qualified in May 2019.

8.2 Since the applicants were declared qualified, they were allowed to upload their e-dossiers. Thereafter, the respondents notified the final result on 12.3.2020 for the posts of Warder and on 13.2.2020 for the posts of Assistant Superintendent. All the applicants were declared selected for appointment to the post of Warder and applicant no.11 as Assistant Superintendent. After notifying the said select list, the respondent no.3 sent the dossiers of the applicants to the respondent no.4. After verifying the dossiers of selected candidates, the respondent No.4 issued offer of appointment to the applicants in August 2020 and they were posted in Delhi Prisons (Final result dated 12.3.2020 and 13.2.2020 as well as offer of appointments are at Annexures A-4 (Colly) & A-5 (Colly). As per aforesaid offer of appointments, the applicants submitted all the original documents and after receiving the said documents, the respondents no.4 again subjected the applicants to the rigorous procedure of identification and thereafter the applicants were sent for medical examination. The applicants' identify has been examined with reference to their names, signatures, date of birth, photographs etc. The applicants were found fit and accordingly, they were appointed to the posts in question during July, 2020 to July 2021, copies of such appointment letters of the applicants are annexed as 3961 , 3910, 3991, 3992 of 2023 Annexure A-6 (Colly.). The concerned officer(s) allowed the applicants to join after verification of all the original documents and identification as per the available record. Meaning thereby, even after selection and offer of appointment by the competent authority, the applicants were again subjected to verification with regard to their eligibility and identity. The applicants joined and started discharging their duties from the date of joining to the satisfaction of competent authority. However, in furtherance of enquiry made on complaint(s) of unsuccessful candidates, the respondents have issued show cause notices dated 21.12.2021 (Annexure A-7 (Colly.) to the applicants on the ground that as per the preliminary enquiry report received from the DSSSB, there is mismatch in finger prints and photograph of the applicants. The respondents have also mentioned in the said show cause notices that as to why necessary action (criminal and departmental) should not be initiated against them, as the mismatch in photograph and finger prints clearly indicate IMPERSONATION. The applicants were shocked on receipt of the aforesaid show cause notices as the same were issued to them without verifying their handwriting, thumb impression, videography so far as verification of photography & fingerprints are concerned, the same was done on a biometric machine and the result as shown at the time of verification was different. Sometime, face was shown as matched 100%, fingers 80% and sometime face 90% and fingers 40%. Even the concerned verification team raised certain 3961 , 3910, 3991, 3992 of 2023 doubts. However, the respondents ignored the same and issued the aforesaid notices to the applicants, which the applicants duly replied (Annexure A-8 (Colly.) in which they have clearly mentioned that they are the genuine candidates. Regarding biometric, the applicants have stated that in view of technical glitches and for want of report of experts, they should not be punished and that too without holding detailed enquiry and taking help of experts.

8.3 The applicants were not even provided biometric verification report and when they requested to provide the same, the respondents have issued Memo dated 9.9.2022 (Annexure A-9 (Colly.) wherein the respondents have virtually recorded finding against the applicants regarding impersonation and that too without any evidence and by ignoring the rigorous verification process as followed by the DSSSB during the time of conducting the said examination. However, the applicants have submitted their replies to the same in September 2022 (Annexure A- 10 (Colly.)) by pleading innocence and requested to verify their identity from CCTV, Videography, thumb impression and writing taken by Invigilator(s). In addition, the applicants were also made to give specimen handwriting and impression of all fingers was also taken, which were done on single page. The applicants followed the instructions of the concerned officials. The respondents have not taken the help of CFSL being expert body, instead of relying on the technicians serving on contract basis and the non-technical persons. There was possibility 3961 , 3910, 3991, 3992 of 2023 of not having even the original thumb impression of the applicants with the concerned team, but the said team tried to cover up their fault and finally, the applicants have been made to suffer for no fault on their part. After completion of the aforesaid exercise, the applicants were never called by the respondents. The respondents did not even inform about the object of said re-verification and the outcome of the process as carried out after two years.

9.5 Learned counsel for the applicants has also urged that the respondents have issued impugned termination notices without application of mind and in violation of their own order dated 14.9.2022 wherein, it has been provided that the authenticity of the candidates should be verified with reference to photograph in the dossier and signature appended by the candidate(s) in the application form/admit card. No such exercise was carried out in the case of the applicants.

9.6 Learned counsel for the applicants has further argued that most of the applicants have participated in many competitive exams conducted by DSSSB/other recruiting agency(ies) and they were declared qualified in aforesaid exams. While conducting exam for warder, the DSSSB did not take bio-metric and only click photograph. Meaning thereby the photograph itself was treated as sufficient to identify the genuineness of the candidate(s) at later stage. In the recruitment under reference, photograph was also taken and videography was also done, however, the same was not made basis to ascertain the genuineness of candidature of the applicants and that the respondents have not treated the fingerprints/impression as taken at the time of attempting the said exam as the only basis to ascertain the identity of the candidate(s) and therefore the respondents had no 3961 , 3910, 3991, 3992 of 2023 authority to make the impression of fingers as the sole basis to terminate the services of the applicants and the respondents were duty bound to verify the genuineness of the candidature of the applicants on the basis of thumb impression, handwriting, photograph, videography etc. as well as by taking the expert opining, i.e., CFSL in the matter. Learned counsel for the applicants has vehemently argued that the three members Committee had no expertise to comment on the genuineness of the reports which are to be examined by the experts.