Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In response to his Original Application, reply was filed by the respondents and it is averred that after the petitioner was called for written examination held on 06.05.2012, he was declared successful and was called for physical examination on 15.10.2012 and after he qualified in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET), he was called by the Railway Recruitment Cell for verification of documents & attendance sheet and at this stage it was revealed that he has not signed the OMR Sheet in the requisite columns in Hindi or in English and as per the guidelines of the advertisement Cl.8.11(xvi), in particular, wherein it was categorically mentioned that due to any other deemed irregularity, if revealed at a later stage, the application form of the incumbent be declared invalid and since the petitioner has not signed the OMR Sheet in the requisite columns, as prescribed, his candidature was rejected and the same has been communicated to him vide letter dt.25.07.2013.

We have heard counsel for the petitioner at length on the issue at hand. Two questions arise for consideration. The first question is as to whether there has at all been a violation of Cl.8.11(xvi) of the Instructions; and the second is as to whether that condition is mandatory or mere directory.

Counsel for petitioner submits that on both counts the decision of the ld.Tribunal ought to have been rendered in favour of the petitioner and further submits that in different columns of the OMR Sheet, xerox copy whereof is on record as Ann.R-4, the applicant is supposed to place thumb impressions and also put his signatures, which is to be countersigned by the Invigilator and confirmation that OMR Sheet is of the concerned applicant whose name has been referred to along with the Roll Number to avoid impersonation. Indisputably, all the formalities including attendance sheet, Roll Number, Left Thumb Impression with verification by the Invigilator are full and complete but he could not put his signature in addition to it in Hindi and in Block Capital Letters in English for which, counsel submits, the condition of signature in Block Capital Letters on OMR Sheet was not mandatory and cancelling his application form on the premise that his signature in full are not indicated in the OMR Sheet despite all other formalities including attendance sheet, Roll Number, pasting of his Left Thumb Impression and verification by Invigilator and his name being shown in the OMR Sheet are complete in all respect and summary rejection of his application at this stage is totally arbitrary and it will not fall in the nature of irregularity, as taken note of by the respondents and considered by the ld.Tribunal falling under Cl.8.11(xvi) of the terms & conditions of the advertisement.

At the outset, it may be noticed that what has been indicated in Cl.8.11(xvi) relates to the application which the candidate has filled, pursuant to the advertisement, while participating in the selection process and indisputably, in the instant case, there is no deficiency or irregularity which has been pointed out in the application form by the respondents to the petitioner while he participated in the selection process. However, the reason forthcoming for rejection of his candidature is that in the OMR Sheet which he filled for appearing in the written examination, there are three separate blocks to mention the name in Block Capital Letters in English, date of examination and a declaration is to be made that candidate has gone through all the terms & conditions of the written examination which is held by the Railway Recruitment Cell and the declaration is to be signed in Block Capital Letters in English and to make it more authenticated, the candidate has to put his Left Thumb Impression and that is to be verified by the Invigilator. However, any kind of alleged discrepancies as pointed out, all the signatures in Block Capital Letters in English not being mentioned by the petitioner in his OMR Sheet is not being regulated in terms of Cl.8.11(xvi) only relates to the application which the candidate has furnished while intending to participate in the selection process, pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Railway Recruitment Cell and as regards terms & conditions of the OMR Sheet, which has been noticed by the ld.Tribunal in para-6 of the order dt.09.07.2014 and condition No.4, in particular, refers to incomplete & incorrect entries and that may render the answersheet invalid and instructions in OMR Sheet in no manner are regulated in terms of Cl.8.11 of the terms & conditions of the advertisement.

Still for our satisfaction, we asked the respondents to substantiate as to what was the object behind insisting upon signature in Capital Letters alone when there is a specific column where the candidate has to put his thumb impression and that has to be verified by the Invigilator and the answer given to us is that it is required to indicate in the OMR Sheet and if not complied with certainly it will be considered to be an invalid OMR Sheet and deserves rejection but we find that object behind the instructions is to ensure that no one is able to impersonate the applicant whose name has been shown in the OMR Sheet and all the other formalities, in the instant case, are fully complied with by the petitioner while indicating his Roll Number & Thumb Impression which are countersigned by the Invigilator. Thus, all possibilities that someone may impersonate the person who has to participate in the examination, have been completely ruled out.