AJIT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two writ petitions preferred by Mr. Ajit Singh and Mr. Naveen Kumar respectively arising from the same background facts. Both these Petitioners responded to an advertisement issued by Respondent No.4, viz. the Staff Selection Commission ("SSC"), inviting applications for recruitment of Sub Inspectors ("SI") in the Central Police Organisation ("CPO"), Assistant SIs in the Central Industrial Security Force ("CISF"), and Intelligence Officers in the Narcotics Control Bureau ("NCB"). The Petitioners were issued admission certificate for the written examination to be conducted on 28th August 2011. It is not in dispute that in the final merit list declared on 1st March 2012 both these Petitioners figure in the list. As far as Mr. Ajit Singh is concerned, he placed at Rank 13 on the merit list whereas Mr. Naveen Kumar placed at Rank 33. In the nomination list, both of them were nominated for the post of SI in the CISF.

(2.) On 6th May 2013, both these candidates were issued identical Show Cause Notices ("SCNs") which read as under:

(3.) Both of them replied to the SCNs pointing out inter alia that there was nothing incriminating against each of them as regards the alleged malpractices committed by them and that the SCNs were based on "surmises and conjectures". This was followed by a communication dated 31st May 2013 from Respondent No.4 to each of them stating that "incontrovertible and reliable evidence have emerged" during the scrutiny of the objective type multiple choice question papers with the help of experts with provable expertise and that as a result of such analysis each of them had "resorted to copying in the said papers in association with other candidates to also took the same examination". At this stage, it may be mentioned that there were other candidates who figured in the selection list who were issued similar SCNs and all of them resorted to judicial remedies against the same.