Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. The brief facts to comprehend the disputes are that the petitioner was enrolled on 8th June, 2011 and was granted the service No.GS-196381W, while being initially put on probation for a period of two years w.e.f. 8th June, 2011 up to 7th June, 2013. According to him, at that time an inquiry was conducted into the alleged irregularities/malpractices committed during the recruitment by the Boards/Centers and GREF Centers. Reliance has also been placed by the petitioner on the communication dated 17th October, 2011 issued by the Secretary Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, respondent No.1, to the Director General, Border Roads, respondent No.2, disclosing that pursuant to the inquiries held in respect of the recruitment of MT Drivers/Electricians/Vehicle Mechanics in BRO, it was noticed that the recruitment had not been conducted in a transparent manner and thus, the entire selection process was to be vitiated. The petitioner had also referred to another letter dated 18th November, 2011 by the Secretary Ministry of Road Transport and Highway issued to the Director General, Border Road, directing him to proceed in accordance with Rules 5 (1) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 pursuant to which, the Director General had issued a letter dated 22nd November, 2011 to the respective units for the termination of the services of the recruits enrolled pursuant to the advertisement issued in the month of June, 2010.

"Subject: Irregularities in recent recruitment for the posts of MT Drivers, Electricians and Vehicle Mechanics in BRO-cancellation of selection process reg.
Reference this Sectt.ID Note of even number dated 26th August, 2011 and Dte. GBR No.1240/Complaint/DGBR/EG2 dated 12th September, 2011 regarding the above subject.
2. The undersigned is directed to state that consequent to the inquiry conducted into the alleged irregularities/malpractices in recent recruitment for the posts of MT Drivers, Electricians and Vehicle Mechanics in BRO, it has been proved that the said recruitment has not been committed by the Recruitment Boards Centres and GREF Centre and thus the entire selection got vitiated, it has therefore been decided as under:-
(a) The entire selection of Electrician, Vehicle Mechanic and MT Driver (Orc Gde) carried out against BRO Advertisement No.1/2010 is hereby cancelled and the services of all those Veh.Mech candidates who have been inducted in GREF Centre, Pune for training be terminated forthwith under Rule 5 of CCS Temporary Service Rule by giving them one month‟s pay in lieu of notice as per the said Rule.

3. Accordingly, DGBR is requested to take action on the above decision immediately and furnish an action taken report urgently.

4. This issues with the approval of Hon‟ble Raksha Mantri."

17. As held in Pavanendra Narayan Verma (supra), firstly it is imperative to ascertain the 'nature of enquiry' i.e. whether the termination was preceded by a full scale formal enquiry into the allegations of misconduct on the part of the employee concerned, which culminated in the finding of guilt. It is clear that in the present facts and circumstances no such inquiry specifying any allegations of misconduct against the petitioner were initiated. It is also not the case of the petitioner that he had been made party to the above mentioned inquiry wherein a finding of his guilt had been arrived at. Secondly, perusal of the above stated communication also reveals that the „purpose of the enquiry', was to inquire into the alleged irregularities/malpractices in the recruitments to the post of MT Drivers, Electricians and Vehicle Mechanics in BRO committed by the Recruitment Boards and officers in certain centers, and not the candidates including the petitioner who had appeared for the same. It is further stipulated in the communication that a decision was taken to vitiate the selection due the malpractices and to initiate action against Officers who were responsible for vitiating the selection process for the tests especially at Rishikesh and Pune centers. It is also evident that the entire selection has been cancelled and thus it is not the petitioner alone who had been terminated pursuant to the said enquiry, but in fact all the candidates who had appeared for the said recruitment had been terminated as well. The petitioner also has been unsuccessful in contenting any cogent grounds for substantiating his plea that the impugned order has cast a stigma on him.