Delhi High Court
Tejavathu Chandu vs Food Corporation Of India & Ors on 21 November, 2013
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) No. 5448/2011
% 21st November, 2013
TEJAVATHU CHANDU ......Petitioner
Through: Mr. Apurb Lal, Advocate.
VERSUS
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS ...... Respondents
Through: Mr. Karunesh Tandon, Advocate for
R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. This case is listed today as 15.11.2013 was declared a holiday.
2. By this writ petition, petitioner who is put at serial no. 1 in the waiting
list for the post of Assistant General Manager (Accounts) seeks direction for
cancellation of the appointment of respondent no.2 who was placed at serial
no.2 in the select list. Both the petitioner and respondent no.2 are aspirants
to the two posts of AGM (Accounts) in the ST Category. If the respondent
no.2‟s name is cancelled as appearing at serial no.2 in the select list, then
WPC 5448/2011 Page 1 of 5
petitioner who is at serial no.1 in the wait list would accordingly get the
appointment.
3. The only issue urged before me and as pleaded in the writ petition for
cancellation of the appointment of respondent no.2 is that respondent no.2
did not give the original documents for verification at the time of interview
and which is so required as per the „General Information and Instructions‟
given in the advertisement. It is argued that as per petitioner‟s personal
knowledge, respondent no.2 had not given the original documents at the time
of interview. Also, though there is no such averment in the writ petition, it
is now argued before me that respondent no. 2 was given two hours time to
produce the original documents.
4. Respondent no.1 has filed a counter-affidavit and has totally denied
the case of the petitioner. It is stated that Recruiting Agency M/s All India
Management Association (AIMA) has specifically informed the respondent
no.1 of document verification of the successful candidates in terms of the
letter dated 14.6.2011. This is stated in para 5.11 of the counter-affidavit of
respondent no.1 and which reads as under:-
"5.11 That the contents of para 5.11 of the Writ Petiton, as
stated, are wrong and denied. Each and every averment
made in the para under reply is palpably wrong and
WPC 5448/2011 Page 2 of 5
hence specifically denied. It is respectfully submitted that
submission of the petitioner is baseless and devoid of any
merits as the Recruiting Agency vide its letter dated
14.06.2011 had submitted the final result/merit list for
the post of AGM (Accounts) along with document
verification repot to the answering respondent. The name
of Shri Ravi Kumar, Roll No. 911050061 (respondent
no.2 herein) appears at Sl. No. 18 in the document
verification report submitted by Recruiting Agency, the
requirement to produce the original documents has been
"COMPLIED" by the respondent no.2. Reference may
be given to what all stated herein above."
5. The letter of AIMA dated 14.6.2011 is annexed with the counter-
affidavit and the same reads as under:-
AIMA/FCI-HQ/CAT-1/2010 14th June 2011
THE DY. GENERAL MANAGER (RPI)
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
HEAD QUARTERS, 16-20,
BARAKHAMBA LANE,
NEW DELHI-11 0 001
Kind Attn: Mr. Debasis Mishra
FINAL RESULT OF RECRUITMENT TEST FOR THE
PSOT OF "AGM(ACCOUNTS)"
Sir,
Reference is made to your letter No.1-5/2010/RPI and your
notification published in the Employment News dated 08
January 2011.
We have completed compilation of results of the candidates
who attended Personal Interview, assigning weightages for
Written Test and Personal Interview in the ratio 87.5:12.5 as
per the guidelines.
WPC 5448/2011 Page 3 of 5
Total 520 candidates had been registered for the written test
held on 3rd April 2011 of which 343 appeared for the test.
Following reports of the 76 candidates shortlisted for
Interviews are submitted herewith:
1 Document Verification Report
2 Category wise Merit List of Eligible Candidates
3 Application forms and attached documents of eligible
candidates
4 CD containing database of the candidates
The reports, together with copies of the candidates‟ documents
may please be perused in default at your end. In case of any
clarification please feel free to contract us. The smooth and fair
administration of the test was made possible purely because of
the guidance, clarifications and cooperation wholeheartedly
extended by you and your team. We remain thankful to you in
this regard.
With warm regards,
Yours sincerely,
Raghu
(Deputy Director-CMS)
6. I may note that petitioner in spite of opportunities has not filed any
rejoinder-affidavit and a statement was made on 16.1.2013 that no rejoinder
affidavit is required to be filed. Contents of the counter-affidavit therefore
being unrebutted will have to be accepted.
7. In any case, I have failed to understand as to how a self serving
averment of the petitioner made without any basis can be believed that
respondent no.2 has failed to give the original documents at the time of
WPC 5448/2011 Page 4 of 5
interview for verification. In my opinion, there is no reason to disbelieve the
letter of AIMA dated 14.6.2011 that there has been original document
verification of the successful candidates. If I allow assertions as are made in
this writ petition to prevail it would mean that on a totally assumptive basis
if an allegation is made, court must believe and act upon the same and grant
the relief. This however cannot be so in law.
8. In view of the above, there is no merit in the petition as respondent
no.2 cannot be said to have not shown the original documents for
verification as is being alleged on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition
is accordingly dismissed, with costs of Rs.20,000/-. Costs can be recovered
by respondent no.1 in accordance with law.
NOVEMBER 21, 2013 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
ib
