Delhi High Court
Narender Kumar vs Staff Selection Commission And ... on 26 February, 2018
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order : February 26, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 1780/2018 & CM No.7476-7477/2018
NARENDER KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Nitin K. Gupta and Mr. Rahul
Sinha, Advocates
Versus
STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ORS...... Respondents
Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC with
Mr. Nikhil Bhardwaj, Advocate for
UOI
Mr. Manoj, Standing Counsel with
Ms. Aparna Sinha, Advocate for
R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
% (ORAL)
1 Quashing of show cause notice of 10th June, 2013 (Annexure P-1)
and order dated 27th January, 2014 (Annexure P-2) vide which petitioner
has been debarred for a period of three years from appearing in the Staff
Selection Commission examinations, is sought in this petition. Petitioner
had appeared in combined recruitment for Assistant Grade III in General
Depot, Technical and Accounts Cadres and Hindi Posts (AG-II) in Food
Corporation of India Examination, 2012 and as per show cause notice
(Annexure P-1) petitioner had resorted to unfair means of copying in the
W.P.(C) 1780/2018 Page 1of 3
said examination. Petitioner's counsel submits that the impugned show
cause notice (Annexure P-1) was duly replied but impugned order
(Annexure P-2) does not disclose any pattern which could lead to a
reasonable inference of petitioner cheating in the examination. Attention
of this Court is drawn to an order dated 19th December, 2014 in W.P.(C)
9055/2014 Staff Selection Commission & Anr. Vs. Sudesh (Annexure P-3)
wherein it has been held that in a case of unfair means, the pattern
discerned by the outside experts upon analysis of the answer-sheets of all
such candidates is not disclosed and that the disclosed pattern which
could lead to a reasonable inference with a very high probability/ near
certainty of cheating/malpractice ought to be brought out, so that such
candidates are not left in dark and are able to meet the serious allegations
levelled against them. It is pointed out that such like show cause notice
has been quashed as the basis for alleging malpractice/copying was not
disclosed.
2 Learned counsel for petitioner draws attention of this Court to
order dated 6th December, 2017 to submit that respondent herein in the
said decision had taken the stand that it would consider the case of
petitioner and other similarly placed persons as and when the issue of
post examination analysis of the examination in question is decided by
the Supreme Court in the case of Staff Selection Commission, Thr. its
Chairman and Anr. v. Sudesh.
3 Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that petitioner's
Representation of 22nd January, 2018 (Annexure P-6) has not been
decided by first respondent till date.
W.P.(C) 1780/2018 Page 2of 3
4 In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate
to dispose of this petition with direction to first respondent to pass a
speaking order on petitioner's Representation (Annexure P-6) within a
period of six weeks and thereafter the fate of Representation be known to
petitioner within a week, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as
available in law. It is expected that the question of delay and laches
would be considered by the first respondent in the light of the stand taken
by respondent herein in Civil Appeal No(s). 2836-2838/2017 titled Staff
Selection Commission, Thr. its Chairman and Anr. v. Sudesh.
5 Needless to say that first respondent shall spell out the pattern
discerned on the basis of which it could be reasonably concluded that the
petitioner had indulged in cheating in the said examination, so that
petitioner may have an effective remedy, if required.
With aforesaid directions, this petition and the applications are
disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 26, 2018
ns
W.P.(C) 1780/2018 Page 3of 3
