Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8: Apart from the aforesaid, as has been contended by the petitioner, the selection of respondent No.5 was done and an order of appointment was issued in his respect where his surname was shown to be 'Kashyap'. However, such a list produced by the petitioner in the writ petition as Annx.P/4 has been seriously disputed by the respondent No.5 and it has been contended that the right list has not been produced by the petitioner. In fact, in the list, manipulation was done in the description of respondent No.5. Though his surname was shown as 'Kashyap', but there were other descriptions such as " A. Ja. Jaa. & Ae, but these words were deliberately omitted from the list produced by the petitioner with the writ petition. The select list has been obtained under Right to Information Act and has been placed on record as Annx.R5/1 by the respondent No.5. It is the allegation made by the respondent No.5 in the return that a manipulated document was filed by the petitioner to show as if the respondent No.5 was initially selected as a General category candidate and not that of a Scheduled Tribe candidate only with an object to cause prejudice against the respondent No.5. Though detailed return has been filed and served on the petitioner, yet no rejoinder to such an allegation has been filed by the petitioner. These are the specific allegations made in paragraph 5 of the return of respondent No.5 which for the purposes of convenience are reproduced as under :-