Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shubham Vats And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 18 October, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:136120
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(271) CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 18.10.2023
Shubham Vats and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Ravinder Singh Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate for the applicants
in CM-11347-CWP-2023.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi J. (Oral)
1. In the present petition, the grievance which is being raised
by the petitioners is that answers to 26 questions have wrongly been
provided in the answer key, hence, the answer key should be revised
accordingly. The further prayer is that the written examination conducted
for the post of Veterinary Surgeon should be re-conducted on the ground
that the said examination is clouded with allegations of copying and the
question paper was leaked prior to conduct of the examination on
15.03.2023. The further prayer is to hand over the enquiry to an
appropriate authority qua the allegations with regard to paper leak.
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:136120
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that not only the
answers to the questions as mentioned in the answer key, which questions
the candidates were made to answer in the written examination, which
examination was conducted on 15.03.2023 were incorrect and also that a
large number of irregularities crept in while conducting the said written
examination including the allegation of mass copying as well as the
question paper was leaked prior to holding of the examination on
15.03.2023, hence, as the sanctity of the said written examination is
under cloud, the said written examination needs to be conducted again or
in the alternative, the appropriate authority should be directed to conduct
appropriate enquiry into the allegations of copying as well as paper leak
as being alleged in the writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent-Commission submits
that qua the first prayer of the petitioners that the answers to 26
questions, which the candidates were made to attempt in the written
examination held on 15.03.2023 were incorrect, it is submitted that after
conducting the written examination, the Commission issued the answer
key and invited objections from the candidates against the said answer
key. The objections so received from the candidates, were put to the
experts and it is only after the experts' opinion, the result of the written
examination was declared, which act is in accordance with the judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 367 of 2017
titled as Ran Vijay Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. & Others,
decided on 11.12.2017, hence, the said plea which is being taken by the
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:136120
petitioners, is not correct keeping in view the facts and circumstances of
the present case.
4. With regard to the allegations of mass copying and paper
leak, learned counsel for the Commission submits that the Commission
received various representations, which were sent to the Investigating
Agency and the Investigating Agency is already looking into the said
aspect for which, the State is in a better position to respond.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record with their able assistance.
6. In the present petition, the challenge is to the selection
process, which process was undertaken by the respondent-Commission
qua the post of Veterinary Surgeon in pursuance to the Advertisement No.
41/2022 dated 11.12.202.
7. Qua the first grievance raised by the learned counsel for the
petitioners qua 26 questions, which according to the petitioners, did not
carry right answers in the answer key, the said plea cannot be accepted
keeping in view the statement of the learned counsel for the respondent-
Commission, according to which, the objections raised by the petitioners
or the other similarly situated candidates qua those very questions were
put to the Expert Committee and the Expert Committee after considering
the objections made by the candidates revised the answer key and
recommended to the Commission, which recommendations were
accepted by the Commission and the Commission has decided to declare
the result of written examination on the basis of the revised answer key,
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:136120
however, the result could not be declared so far due to the interim order
passed by this Court.
8. Keeping in view the fact that the recommendations of the
Expert Committee with regard to the objections raised have already been
accepted by the Commission and it has been stated before this Court that
while declaring the result of the written examination held on 15.03.2023,
the revised answer key as re-commended by the Expert Committee will
be implemented, no further grievance of the petitioners survives on the
said account.
9. With regard to the allegations that there was mass copying
and the paper in question was leaked, it has been stated by the learned
counsel for the respondent-Commission that keeping in view the
representations made by the petitioners to the Commission, the same
have already been forwarded to the police and the police is looking into
the allegations alleged in those complaints so as to find out the
genuinity/truth behind the allegations alleged in those complaints. That
being the position, no further orders are required to be passed by this
Court at this stage as, the matter is already before the Investigating
Agency qua the allegations being alleged in the present petition.
10. It may be noticed that once the police is investigating the
allegation being alleged by the petitioners qua mass copying and paper
leak, the same cannot be made a ground to stall the selection process but
once, the allegations made by the petitioners are being investigated by the
Investigating Agency, any selection which is to be made by the
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:136120
respondents to the post in question will be subject to the outcome of the
report of the said Investigating Agency.
11. Further, in case any report is submitted by the Investigating
Agency before the appointment of the selected candidates, the State is
directed to keep in mind the recommendations of the Investigating
Agency while making the appointment and the same should be dealt with
in accordance with law.
12. If the report of the Investigating Agency is not received upto
the date of appointment, in the appointment order, it should be duly
mentioned that the appointment in question will be subject to the
outcome of the report of the Investigating Agency qua the allegation of
mass copying and the paper leak and the State will be within its
jurisdiction to take appropriate action in case, any recommendation is
made by the Investigating Agency against any of the selected/appointed
candidates.
13. Learned State counsel submits that next date for
investigation is fixed for as 23.10.2023, wherein certain candidates have
been called for so as to ascertain the factual position qua the allegations
and any material, which the petitioners have in their possession to
support the allegations, the same be submitted to the Investigating
Agency for their consideration as the State is against manipulative
selection being a welfare estate.
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
CWP No. 2710 of 2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:136120
14. Keeping in view the above, the present writ petition is
disposed of with the direction that any selection will be made, the same
will be done in accordance with the observation made hereinbefore.
CM-11347-CWP-2023
As the main petition has been disposed of, no order is
required to be passed in the present application.
Dismissed.
October 18, 2023 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
kanchan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:136120
6 of 6
