Secretary Tamilnadu Public Service ... vs A.B.Natarajan & Ors.Etc.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 5877-78 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP (c) Nos.8980-8981 of 2011)

Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission ... Appellant

Versus

A.B. Natarajan & Ors. Etc. ... Respondents

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 5880-81 OF 2014, (Arising out of SLP (c) Nos.26143-26144 of 2011)

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 5882-83 OF 2014, (Arising out of SLP (c) Nos.26145-26146 of 2011)

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5884 OF 2014, (Arising out of SLP (c) No.26597 of 2012)

AND

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5879 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP (c) No.9225 of 2011)

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2014.07.01 14:52:36 IST Reason: 2

JUDGMENT

ANIL R. DAVE, J.

Leave granted.

2. As all these appeals have been filed against a common

judgment dated 4th March, 2011, delivered by the High

Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Appeal Nos.1063 and

1287 of 2009, they have been heard together and decided by

this common judgment.

3. The facts giving rise to the present litigation in a

nutshell are as follows.

The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’) had issued an

advertisement on 27th December, 2000, inviting applications

for 95 posts for Group I Services. Subsequently, the

vacancies had been decreased and it was notified that in all

91 vacancies had to be filled up.

4. In pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement, several

candidates had submitted their applications and ultimately

they had also appeared in the preliminary examination.

The candidates who had been declared qualified in the 3

preliminary examination were asked to appear in the main

written examination. Subsequently, oral interviews had

been conducted of the candidates who were selected in the

main examination and thereafter a final select list had been

prepared by the Commission.

5. Writ petitions had been filed in the Madras High Court

contending that the scaling technique was not properly

applied by the Commission and certain irregularities had

been committed in the examination. There were

amendments in the petitions and subsequently it was also

alleged that there were some malpractices and a prayer was

made to the effect that the Central Bureau of Investigation

should be directed to look into the matter.

6. When the petitions were heard by the learned Single

Judge of the High Court, an advocate was appointed as the

Court Commissioner to look into the alleged irregularities

and in pursuance thereof a report had been submitted by

the learned advocate. Once again, another advocate was

appointed as the Court Commissioner to look into the

allegations and inspect the answer books to find out 4

whether the instructions given to the candidates had been strictly adhered to while answering the question papers. A

report was also submitted by the other learned advocate.

Both the reports had been considered by the learned Single

Judge and ultimately the learned Single Judge had

dismissed the petitions. Being aggrieved by dismissal of

the petitions, appeals had been filed before the Division

Bench of the High Court, which had been heard at length.

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties,

the appeals had been allowed by a common judgment,

which has been challenged in these appeals.

7. The appellate Court came to the conclusion that there

were material irregularities committed by the candidates

while answering the questions. Several instructions given

to the candidates had been grossly violated by the

candidates. Details with regard to the irregularities

committed by the candidates, which could have resulted

into malpractices, have been detailed by the appellate Court

in the impugned judgment.

5

8. Upon perusal of the judgment it is clear that most of

the candidates had not adhered to the instructions given to

them, which were to be followed while answering the

questions. The candidates had made several unwarranted

indications or markings in their answer books, which ought

not to have been made by them. Though use of coloured

pens had been prohibited, several candidates had used

colours other than blue, blue-black and black, which were

the only permissible colours. Use of pencil was not

permitted and yet pencil markings were made by several

candidates. Several candidates had given different

indications by putting certain religious symbols. Moreover,

certain pages of answer books were deliberately kept blank

though they were supposed to write on each page. All these

indications given by the candidates, which were not called for, were considered very seriously by the Division Bench of

the High Court and after referring to all these irregularities,

the Division Bench had allowed the appeals.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants,

namely, the Commission and the selected candidates, had 6

mainly submitted that the Division Bench had exceeded its

jurisdiction and had violated not only the principles of

natural justice, but had also decided the appeals, though all

the selected candidates were not before the Court. It had

also been submitted that use of colours other than the

colours prescribed in the instructions given to the

candidates or use of pencil was not very serious. Moreover,

giving an indication with regard to any religion should not

have been taken seriously by the appellate Court. It had

also been submitted that proper notice had not been

effected upon all the selected candidates and therefore, also

the appellate Court was not right in allowing the appeals. It

had also been alleged that the State of Tamil Nadu, the

appointing authority, had not been impleaded as a party

respondent at the time when the petitions had been filed,

though the State of Tamil Nadu was a necessary party. For

the aforestated reasons, it had been submitted by the

learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the

impugned judgment deserved to be quashed and set aside. 7

The learned counsel had also supported their submissions

with certain judgments delivered by this Court.

10. On the other hand, it had been submitted by the

learned counsel appearing for the respondents, mainly

appearing for the candidates who had not been declared

successful, that the appeals deserved dismissal for the

reason that the appellate Court had duly considered all

relevant facts and had come to a clear finding that serious irregularities had been committed by the candidates which

might have given rise to serious malpractices and therefore,

the final select list prepared by the Commission had been

rightly ordered to be modified by the High Court. It had

been further submitted that a clear indication was given in

the order of appointment that appointments of all the

selected candidates were subject to final outcome of the writ

petition which had been filed in the High Court. Moreover,

not only notices had been issued to the selected candidates,

pendency of the litigation had been duly advertised so as to

enable the selected candidates to appear before the Court,

but for the reasons best known to the concerned 8

candidates, they did not appear before the High Court and

ultimately the appellate Court had passed the impugned

judgment. In the circumstances, they must thank

themselves for their non-appearance before the Court. It

had also been submitted that initially the State of Tamil

Nadu had not been joined for the reason that the entire

selection process had been challenged and the selection

process had been conducted by the Commission and not by

the State. The learned counsel had also supported their

submissions with certain judgments delivered by this Court.

For the aforestated reasons, the learned counsel appearing

for the respondents had submitted that the impugned

judgment is just and proper and the appeals deserved

dismissal.

11. We had heard the learned counsel at length and had

also considered the judgments cited by them.

12. Upon hearing the learned counsel and considering the

facts of the case, in our opinion, the impugned judgment is

just and proper and does not deserve any interference. 9

13. It is an admitted fact that serious irregularities had

been committed by the candidates in their answer books. If

one looks at the instructions, which had been given to the

candidates for writing the answer books, it is clear that they

had been informed in unequivocal terms that they had to

use only blue, blue-black or black ink and they were

supposed to use only fountain pen, steel pen or ballpoint

pen. In spite of the said instructions, several candidates

had used sketch pens, pencils and pens or pencils with

different colours. Use of different colours or pencil could

have given some indication to the examiner about the

identity of the candidate. These facts clearly show that

either the candidates were absolutely careless or they

wanted to give some indication with regard to themselves to

the examiner. If a candidate writes his answer book giving

some indication with regard to himself with the help of a

different ink or pencil - other than the prescribed writing

instrument and the colour of ink, one can definitely

presume that the candidate did not act in a bona fide

manner.

10

14. There was a specific direction that the candidates had

to start writing the answer books from the first page and no

page should be left blank. In spite of the said clear

instruction, several candidates kept several pages blank and

what is most astonishing is that some of the candidates,

after keeping the entire page blank i.e. without answering

the question had written some irrelevant words or names.

As for example, in one case on the entire page ‘MANI’ was

written. This is nothing but some indication to the

examiner, which is definitely not permitted.

15. Many of the candidates had given some indication with

regard to some religion by writing the words or signs

connected with a particular religion. A candidate is not supposed to give his identity or any indication with regard

to himself in the answer books. If he does so, he is

violating the instructions given to him which would amount

to nothing but misconduct.

16. In all competitive examinations, an effort is always

made to see that the answer books are examined impartially

and without any bias. An effort is always made to see that 11

identity of the candidate is not revealed to the person

examining the answer books so as to see that the identity

i.e. the name or roll number of the candidate is not

revealed. A code number is given to each answer book.

The roll number given to the candidate is normally replaced

by another number so that even the examiner may not

know the correct roll number of the candidate. This is done

so as to remove the possibility of giving any indication by

anyone to the examiner about the identity of the candidate.

Upon completion of the examination work, original roll

number of the candidate is put on the answer book or on

the sheet prepared for the purpose of assigning marks, but

in any case, the examiners are not permitted to know

anything about the candidate or his identity.

17. If the candidates start giving indications with regard to

themselves by writing their name or some code word or

some indication with an intention to convey the same to an

examiner, so that he may have some undue favour, is a

thing which is not approved. If such an attempt is

permitted to be made, sanctity of the examination work 12

would not be maintained. The entire object behind giving

code number etc. would be frustrated if all these things are

permitted or tolerated.

18. Normally, a straightforward candidate, who does not

want to indulge in any malpractice, would never make any effort to reveal his identity or make any special marking in

his answer book. The purpose behind doing something

abnormal or something which is not permitted, can be said

to be an indication to the examiner about the identity of the

candidate. Such an action on the part of the candidate

cannot be tolerated if one wants clean, fair and transparent

process of selection.

19. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that there

were serious violations of the instructions given to the

candidates while answering the questions. Although all

these details were placed before the learned Single Judge,

the learned Single Judge did not give importance to these

irregularities and dismissed the petitions, but when the

appeals were filed, in our opinion, the Division Bench of the

High Court rightly understood the importance of such 13

irregularities and allowed the appeals by setting aside the

selection of the candidates who had committed such

irregularities while writing their answer books. We are of

the view that if such a strict view is not taken by a

constitutional body which has been entrusted with the work

of selecting best candidates, the entire purpose behind

having the Commission or any other such body for

examining merit of candidates would be frustrated. We are,

therefore, of the view that the appellate Court was

absolutely justified in allowing the appeals and by holding

that all those candidates who had committed material

irregularities could not be declared selected.

20. Several allegations had been made with regard to the

procedural aspect. It had been submitted that all the

selected candidates had not been joined as respondents and

even the State of Tamil Nadu had not been joined as a

respondent initially. Initially only one petition had been

filed when the result had not been declared and it was also not possible for the petitioners to join all selected

candidates. Subsequently, an advertisement had been 14

given in the newspapers giving indication about the

pendency of the petition so as to enable the selected

candidates to appear before the Court. Moreover, the

appointment letters gave an indication of the fact that a

litigation challenging their appointment was pending in the

High Court. In spite of the aforesaid fact being stated in the

appointment order and the advertisement, if selected

candidates did not bother to appear before the Court, by no

stretch of imagination, it can be said that the selected

candidates were not given an opportunity to represent their

case. We, therefore, do not find any substance in the

allegations with regard to non-joinder of selected candidates

or even the State of Tamil Nadu.

21. The candidates who had applied for Class-I post, if

selected, were to be Class-I Officers of the State of Tamil

Nadu. Not following the instructions given to them while

appearing in the examination, which had been conducted

for their selection, would either mean that they were so

careless that they did not read or bother about the

instructions to be followed or they wanted to give some 15

indication to the examiner about their identity. In either

case, such a candidate can not be selected. A candidate,

who is so careless that he does not bother about his own

interest, cannot be expected to become a good officer.

Interest of the candidate is to get through the examination

and for that purpose he has to follow the instructions. By

not following the instructions, he does not take care of his

own interest. So, if he has written the answer books

carelessly without bothering about the instructions given to him, he is a careless person who must not be appointed as

an officer and if he has done it deliberately, then also he

should not be appointed as an officer because one who

plans such illegalities even before joining his service, cannot

be expected to become a fair and straightforward officer.

So, in either case, such a candidate cannot be selected for

appointment as an officer and that too a Class-I Officer of

any State.

22. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, we are of the

view that the Division Bench of the High Court was justified

in delivering the impugned common judgment. The law 16

propounded in the judgments referred to by the counsel for

the appellants cannot be disputed, but looking at the facts

of the instant case, we are of the view that the said

judgments would be of no help to them.

23. In the circumstances, the appeals are dismissed with

no order as to costs.

.........................J (ANIL R. DAVE)

..........................J (DIPAK MISRA ) NEW DELHI June 30, 2014.

17

ITEM NO.1B COURT NO.6 SECTION XII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8980-8981/2011

SECRETARY TAMILNADU PUBLIC SERVICE COMM Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

A.B.NATARAJAN & ORS.ETC. Respondents(s)

WITH SLP(C) No. 9225/2011 SLP(C) No. 26143-26144/2011 SLP(C) No. 26145-26146/2011 SLP(C) No. 26597/2012

Date : 30/06/2014 These petitions were called on for Judgment today.

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jayant Muth Raj, Adv. Mrs. Malvika J., Adv. Mr. Sureshan P., Adv.

Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, Adv.

Mr. V. G. Pragasam, Adv. Mr. Aristotle Joseph, Adv. Mr. Prabhu Ramasubramani,Adv.

Mr. V. Balachandran , Adv.

Mr. S. Srinivasan, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. B. Balaji, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anand Sathiyaseelan, Adv.

Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, Adv. Mr. K. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, Adv. Mr. Vaishali Dixit, Adv. Ms. Shristi Govil, Adv. 18

Mrs. Geetha Kovilan, Adv. Mr. P.R. Kovilan, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Adv. Mr. V. Vasudevan, Adv.

Mr. Naresh Kumar ,Adv. Mr. C. K. Sasi ,Adv. Ms. T. Anamika ,Adv.

Mr. B. Ramana Murthy ,Adv.

Ms. T. Anamika , Adv.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave pronouned the

Reportable Judgment of the Bench comprising His Lordship

and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra, J.

Leave granted.

The Civil Appeals are dismissed.

(Jayant Kumar Arora) (Sneh Bala Mehra) Sr. P.A. Assistant Registrar

(Signed Reportable Judgment is placed on the file)