S.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.
1. In both the writ petitions, as similar prayer has been made they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Petitioner Vivek Kumar and two others of W.P. (S) No. 2653 of 2005 have challenged the order contained in letter No. 813. dated 12th April. 2004 issued by the Secretary, Agriculture and Cane Development Department. Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder. the process of recruitment for appointment of Marketing Supervisors in the Jharkhand Stale Agricultural Marketing Board, (hereinafter referred to as the Marketing Board) has been cancelled. Further prayer has been made to set aside the order dated 15th April, 2005 Issued by the Managing Director, Marketing Board, Jharkhand. Ranchi, whereby and whereundcr the process of appointment to the post of Marketing Supervisors has been cancelled.
Petitioner Shiv Shankar Chatterjee of W.P. (S) No. 2974 of 2005 while challenged the decision taken by the State of Jharkhand for cancellation of selection in question has also prayed for direction on the respondents to publish the final result of interview and to issue letters of appointment to the post of Marketing Supervisor, from amongst the successful candidates.
3. As the cases can be disposed of on short points, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except the relevant one nor it is necessary to decide all the issues, as raised in the writ petitions.
4. It may be stated that prior to creation of the State of Jharkhand. one Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board at Patna was functioning. It is only after reorganization of the State and creation of the State of Jharkhand, a separate Marketing Board in the name and style of Jharkhand Slate Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi has been constituted.
5. One Samir Kumar Sinha who was Initially appointed on dally wage as Clerk-cum-fee Collector in the Market Committee Dumka was allowed to perform duty of Marketing Supervisor on daily wage by an Order No. 545. dated 28th April, 1989. He moved before Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court In C.W.J.C. No. 9198 of 1998 (R) for regularization of his service. The case was taken up in the year 2002. By that time Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board. Ranchi having come into existence, it was impleaded as party-respondent to the said case. Having noticed relevant provisions of law and order passed by the High Court in earlier cases, a Bench of this Court vide its order dated 6th September, 2002 remitted the case to the Managing Director of Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi with direction to fill up the vacant posts of Marketing Supervisors, in accordance with law, within lour months. The said order having not been complied, said Samir Kumar Sinha preferred a Contempt Case (Civil) No. 149 of 2003 before this Court, wherein by order dated 19th August, 2003 further time was allowed to conclude the selection. The Jharkhand State Marketing Board. Ranchi. thereafter, published an Advertisement in the newspaper Prabhat Khabar on 16th May. 2004 and other newspapers calling for applications for appointment to the post of Marketing Supervisors. The petitioner along with other applied and appeared in the written test held on 16th January, 2005. Result was also published and successful candidates were called for to appear in the Interview. Roll numbers of successful candidates were also published in the newspapers on 15th March, 2005. Individual letters of interview were issued to the successful candidates, including the petitioner and they appeared in the interview. It is informed that a merit list was also prepared, but before issuance of the letters of appointment, impugned order of cancellation of selection has been Issued.
6. The main plea taken on behalf of the petitioners is that the State Government has no Jurisdiction to interfere with day-to-day functioning of Marketing Board, nor can issue any direction regarding appointment of its employees.
Further according to petitioners examination was conducted, in accordance with law and no illegality was committed, therefore, there was no occasion for the State to cancel the examination and selection on mere presumption.
7. Learned Advocate General for the State while, relied on Sections 33-E and 33-L of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960, submitted that the Jharkhand State Marketing Board, Ranchi without approval of the fresh regulation proceeded with and made selection for appointment of Marketing Supervisors. He relied on a report to suggest that gross irregularity was committed in holding the written test and kith and kins of some of the officers of Jharkhand State Marketing Board were favoured and were declared successful. Reliance was also placed on an affidavit filed by the Chairman. Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi in support of such stand. He further submitted that the State Government has jurisdiction to issue appropriate direction to the Marketing Board. According to him, new regulations having not been approved by the State of Jharkhand, earlier Regulation, namely, Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board Employees Service Conditions Regulation, 1978. is effective but the Jharkhand Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranehi had not followed the procedure as laid down therein.
8. The Managing Director of Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board. Ranchi has supported the stand taken by the petitioners. According to him. steps for appointment were taken in terms with the High Court's direction. He relied on an order dated 19th August. 2004 passed by this Court in Contempt Case (Civil) No. 149 of 2003. wherein this Court directed (he Agricultural Marketing Board. Ranchi to take steps to frame Rules for appointment to the post of Marketing Supervisors within three weeks but in case no Rule is framed, to complete selection for appointment of Marketing Supervisors, in accordance with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
It appears that a regulation, known as 'Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board Employees Appointment Regulations 2004' was drafted and forwarded to the Government of Jharkhand for its approval, but approval having not received, process of selection was started. Forty posts of Marketing Supervisors were advertised in response to which. 13.718 applications were found to be valid, who were issued Admit Cards for appearing in the written examination held on 16th January, 2005. Altogether, 25 Examination Centres located in different Schools and Colleges of Ranehi were selected for holding written test.
According to the Managing Director, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranehi and Senior S.P. Ranchi deputed Magistrate and Police Force. Question papers were printed from a Security Press and sealed covers were handed over by the representatives of the Security Press directly to the State Bank of India where the question papers were kept in the Strong Room! Before starting of examination, Magistrates and Police Force took delivery of the sealed packets of question papers from the Strong Room of the State Bank of India, 1-1/2 hours before scheduled time and taken them to the Examination Centres and handed over the same to the Centre Superintendents. On his request, the Deputy Commissioner and Senior S.P. Ranchi had deputed one Static Magistrate and sufficient Police force at each of the Examination Centres. The examination was concluded without any disturbance or obstruction from any quarter. The patrolling Magistrate along with their Police party took delivery of question papers and answer-sheets in sealed covers from Centre Superintendents of each Examination Centre. They themselves brought those sealed packets and kept them in the Strong Room. After examination, steps were taken for evaluation of the answer books. The Officers of the Marketing Board were authorized to take delivery to the sealed packets and to make random Code No. of each examinee and detached part containing Roll Numbers from the answer sheets and then re-sealed the answer papers in separate packets. The scaled packets of detached parts with Roll Numbers were kept by the Managing Director in his custody. The packets containing the answer sheets were forwarded for evaluation to the Professors and Teachers of different Colleges and Schools. On receipt of sealed packets containing the evaluated answer sheets, the Managing Director himself ascertained the marks obtained by each examinee on comparing the Code number of the answer sheets with that of the detached part of the answer sheets. The complete tabulation of marks obtained by each examinee was prepared and 220 candidates from top of the merit list were called for interview. The Roll Nos. of those 220 candidates were published in two newspapers, namely, 'Prabhat Khabar and Hindustan Times' on 17th March, 2005 and the candidates were informed the dates of interview held between Ist April 2005 and 5th May 2005.
According to the Managing Director, Interview Board consisted of himself as the Chairman of the Board and the other members, were Shri V. Jayaram, Director, Agriculture, Shri Junnu Kisku, Additional Secretary, Department of Planning and Development and Dr. R.P. Singh; Professor and Chairman of the Department of Agricultural Economics in Birsa Agriculture University. After completion of interview, step was taken to declare the names of successful candidates but in the meantime, the letter of cancellation was issued by the State Government.
9. In the present case, it is not necessary to decide the question as to whether the State Government has jurisdiction under Sections 33-E and 33-L of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960 to cancel any examination for appointment in Marketing Board and/or any jurisdiction to give direction. It is also not necessary to decide the question as to whether the appointment should have been made in terms with 1978 Regulations for the reasons mentioned below and in view of affidavit filed by the Chairman, Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi.
According to the Chairman of the Jharkhand Agricultural Produce Marketing Board, Ranchi several complaints were received against one Shri Bahadur Prasad, the then Director (Vigilance), who was also holding the post of Secretary, Marketing Board (Headquarters), Ranchi, as also the post of Director, Marketing Board (Headquarters), Ranchi. Some of such letters of complaints have been annexed as Annexure-C series to the affidavit.
Further case of the Chairman is that on receipt of the complaints, he referred the matter to the Managing Director of Marketing Board, Ranchi for necessary enquiry and action. The Managing Director was also directed not to publish the result before completion of the enquiry by letter dated 22nd March, 2005. Later on the allegations referred to were found to be prima facie correct. There were wide spread allegations of question papers leak prior to the examination which was also reported in the newspapers. A number of representations were filed by parties before the Governor of Jharkhand who ultimately referred the matter to Secretary.
10. The following statement has been made by the Chairman at Paragraph 11 to his affidavit :
11. That it now transpires that following irregularities are very much apparent which was reflected in the report. A brief prima jade report has been prepared by the Answering Respondent and submitted before the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Jharkhand which is as follows :
1. The said Bahadur Prasad got the question papers printed at Kolkata and he himself brought the same alongwith him and no secrecy was maintained.
2. The son, nephew, son in law and Daughter of Bahadur Prasad have been declared selected in the selection process whose Roll Nos. are 00605, 08093, 04137, 05948 and 01024 respectively.
3. That in the question papers and the answer book no serial numbers was mentioned which confirms that the same was not printed from the Certified Security Press and allegation of wide mass scale bungling appears to be true.
4. The answer-sheet was to be scrutinized from the computer but the same was done manually.
5. Answer-sheet of one set such as Group B answer-sheet were re-evaluated and marks of many persons were increased whereas similar infirmities with respect to other groups were left untouched.
6. Interview letters issued to the selected candidates is not reflected in the issue register/dispatch register of the Board which itself confirms Mass Irregularities in the entire selection process.
7. As apparent from the above the appointment rules was prepared by the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing Board, Ranchi at his own level and the same was not placed before the Board for its confirmation and till today appointment rules has not been adopted by the Board.
Photocopy of the
report is annexed herewith
and marked as Annexure-G with
this counter affidavit.
11. It was informed that an independent enquiry through an independent Agency required to be made immediately against the Managing Director and said Bahadur Prasad to take appropriate action against them.
It was also informed that the cut off marks for Backward Category was shown to be 69 whereas cut off marks for General Category was shown to be 60 and thereby a number of persons were illegally declared successful. It was submitted on behalf of the Chairman that the Backward Category candidates having been allowed minimum cut off marks of 69, the minimum cut off marks for General Category cannot be less than 69. Though the exact vacancy was 15 (fifteen) but 40 (forty) posts were advertised.
12. Learned Advocate General appearing for the State referred to a Hindi newspaper report published in 'Dainik Jagran' on 17th January, 2005 i.e. the very next date of examination. Therein it was reported that the question papers had been leaked and sold. The leaked questions from SI. Nos. 56 to 63 were also published in the newspaper. It was submitted that even the newspapers could get hold of the question papers and published the questions along with their report, though as per the direction, the question papers were to be returned by candidates to the invigilators.
The respondents have produced the original answer books of the candidates who are alleged to be son, daughter, daughter-in-law etc. of one Bahadur Prasad.
13. I have also perused some of the answer books; one of the answer books have been evaluated twice. It is stated that some of the answer books were again re-evaluated though there is nothing on the record to suggest that any such decision was taken by the Board.
14. In view of the allegations made by the Chairman, Jharkhand Agricultural Produce Marketing Board, Ranchi and in the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that a fresh examination should be held giving opportunity to all those who applied in pursuance of the advertisement in question. The interference with order of cancellation of examination will not be proper in the public interest. The respondents are expected to hold examination afresh with all fairness through an independent Agency having experience and credentials. It will be desirable if question papers are set by experts and are printed in Government Security Press or a Press of such repute recognized by the State Government. No relief can be granted to the petitioners.
15. There being no merit, both the writ petitions are dismissed.