Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 Supreme(SC) 2058

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KURIAN JOSEPH, UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.
ALOK KUMAR SINGH & ORS. - Petitioners
Vs.
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. - Respondents
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 12538/2016, S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 22932/2016, SLP(C) No. 34047/2016, SLP(C) No. 16723/2017, SLP(C) No. 16669/2017, SLP(C) No. 9028/2018, SLP(C) No. 9033/2018, SLP(C) No. 9026/2018, Diary No. 22129-2017, Diary No. 22319-2017, Diary No. 22536-2017, Diary No. 22655-2017, W.P.(C) No. 735/2017, Diary No. 25266-2017, W.P.(C) No. 736/2017, T.C.(C) No. 51/2017, T.C.(C) No. 182/2017, T.C.(C) No. 52/2017, T.C.(C) No. 53/2017, T.C.(C) No. 54/2017, T.C.(C) No. 55/2017, T.C.(C) No. 56/2017 ,T.C.(C) No. 57/2017, T.C.(C) No. 58/2017, T.C.(C) No. 59/2017 , IA No.90441/2017, T.C.(C) No. 60/2017, T.C.(C) No. 62/2017, T.C.(C) No. 61/2017, T.C.(C) No. 63/2017, T.C.(C) No. 64/2017, T.C.(C) No. 65/2017, T.C.(C) No. 66/2017, T.C.(C) No. 67/2017, T.C.(C) No. 68/2017, T.C.(C) No. 69/2017, T.C.(C) No. 70/2017, T.C.(C) No. 71/2017, T.C.(C) No. 73/2017, T.C.(C) No. 74/2017, T.C.(C) No. 75/2017, T.C.(C) No. 77/2017, T.C.(C) No. 79/2017, T.C.(C) No. 80/2017, T.C.(C) No. 81/2017, T.C.(C) No. 83/2017, IA No.138528/2017, T.C.(C) No. 84/2017, T.C.(C) No. 85/2017, T.C.(C) No. 86/2017, T.C.(C) No. 87/2017, T.C.(C) No. 88/2017, T.C.(C) No. 89/2017, T.C.(C) No. 90/2017, T.C.(C) No. 91/2017, T.C.(C) No. 93/2017, T.C.(C) No. 96/2017, T.C.(C) No. 97/2017, T.C.(C) No. 98/2017, IA No.26344/2018 , T.C.(C) No. 99/2017, T.C.(C) No. 100/2017, T.C.(C) No. 101/2017, IA No.111326/2017, T.C.(C) No. 102/2017, T.C.(C) No. 103/2017, T.C.(C) No. 104/2017, T.C.(C) No. 105/2017, T.C.(C) No. 106/2017, T.C.(C) No. 108/2017, T.C.(C) No. 109/2017, T.C.(C) No. 110/2017, T.C.(C) No. 111/2017, T.C.(C) No. 112/2017, T.C.(C) No. 113/2017, T.C.(C) No. 114/2017, T.C.(C) No. 115/2017, T.C.(C) No. 116/2017, T.C.(C) No. 117/2017, T.C.(C) No. 118/2017, T.C.(C) No. 120/2017, T.C.(C) No. 121/2017, T.C.(C) No. 122/2017, T.C.(C) No. 123/2017, IA No.6584/2018, T.C.(C) No. 124/2017, T.C.(C) No. 125/2017, IA No.6596/2018T.C.(C) No. 126/2017, T.C.(C) No. 127/2017, T.C.(C) No. 128/2017, T.C.(C) No. 129/2017, T.C.(C) No. 131/2017, T.C.(C) No. 132/2017, T.C.(C) No. 133/2017, T.C.(C) No. 134/2017, T.C.(C) No. 135/2017, IA No.26347/2018, T.C.(C) No. 136/2017, T.C.(C) No. 137/2017, T.C.(C) No. 138/2017, IA No.111311/2017, T.C.(C) No. 140/2017, T.C.(C) No. 142/2017, T.C.(C) No. 143/2017, T.C.(C) No. 144/2017, T.C.(C) No. 145/2017, T.C.(C) No. 146/2017, T.C.(C) No. 147/2017, T.C.(C) No. 148/2017, T.C.(C) No. 149/2017, T.C.(C) No. 150/2017, T.C.(C) No. 151/2017, T.C.(C) No. 152/2017, T.C.(C) No. 153/2017, T.C.(C) No. 154/2017, T.C.(C) No. 155/2017, T.C.(C) No. 156/2017, T.C.(C) No. 157/2017, T.C.(C) No. 159/2017, IA No.6589/2018, T.C.(C) No. 161/2017, T.C.(C) No. 162/2017, T.C.(C) No. 163/2017, T.C.(C) No. 165/2017, T.C.(C) No. 166/2017, T.C.(C) No. 167/2017, T.C.(C) No. 168/2017, T.C.(C) No. 169/2017, T.C.(C) No. 171/2017, T.C.(C) No. 172/2017, T.C.(C) No. 173/2017, T.C.(C) No. 175/2017, T.C.(C) No. 176/2017, T.C.(C) No. 177/2017, T.C.(C) No. 178/2017, T.C.(C) No. 180/2017, T.C.(C) No. 181/2017, T.C.(C) No. 183/2017, T.C.(C) No. 184/2017, T.C.(C) No. 107/2017, T.C.(C) No. 141/2017, T.C.(C) No. 219/2017, T.C.(C) No. 226/2017, T.C.(C) No. 227/2017, T.C.(C) No. 220/2017, T.C.(C) No. 192/2017, T.C.(C) No. 216/2017, T.C.(C) No. 200/2017, T.C.(C) No. 185/2017, T.C.(C) No. 186/2017, T.C.(C) No. 187/2017, T.C.(C) No. 188/2017, T.C.(C) No. 189/2017, T.C.(C) No. 190/2017, T.C.(C) No. 191/2017, T.C.(C) No. 194/2017, T.C.(C) No. 195/2017, T.C.(C) No. 196/2017, T.C.(C) No. 197/2017, T.C.(C) No. 199/2017, T.C.(C) No. 201/2017, T.C.(C) No. 202/2017, T.C.(C) No. 203/2017, IA No.6591/2018, T.C.(C) No. 204/2017, T.C.(C) No. 205/2017, T.C.(C) No. 207/2017, T.C.(C) No. 206/2017, T.C.(C) No. 213/2017, T.C.(C) No. 215/2017, T.C.(C) No. 214/2017, T.C.(C) No. 217/2017, T.C.(C) No. 218/2017, T.C.(C) No. 222/2017, T.C.(C) No. 221/2017, T.C.(C) No. 224/2017, T.C.(C) No. 225/2017, T.C.(C) No. 228/2017, T.C.(C) No. 229/2017, T.C.(C) No. 230/2017, T.C.(C) No. 232/2017, T.C.(C) No. 234/2017, T.C.(C) No. 241/2017, T.C.(C) No. 248/2017, T.C.(C) No. 252/2017, T.C.(C) No. 231/2017, T.C.(C) No. 250/2017, T.C.(C) No. 233/2017, T.C.(C) No. 247/2017, T.C.(C) No. 246/2017, T.C.(C) No. 235/2017, T.C.(C) No. 242/2017, T.C.(C) No. 236/2017, T.C.(C) No. 237/2017, T.C.(C) No. 243/2017, T.C.(C) No. 244/2017, T.C.(C) No. 238/2017, T.C.(C) No. 239/2017, T.C.(C) No. 254/2017, T.C.(C) No. 255/2017, T.C.(C) No. 245/2017, SLP(C) No. 15876/2018, W.P.(C) No. 1053/2017, T.C.(C) No. 277/2017, T.C.(C) No. 278/2017, T.C.(C) No. 279/2017, T.C.(C) No. 280/2017, T.C.(C) No. 281/2017, T.C.(C) No. 282/2017, T.C.(C) No. 283/2017, T.C.(C) No. 289/2017, T.C.(C) No. 284/2017, T.C.(C) No. 285/2017, T.C.(C) No. 287/2017, T.C.(C) No. 286/2017, T.C.(C) No. 288/2017, T.C.(C) No. 291/2017, T.C.(C) No. 292/2017, T.C.(C) No. 297/2017, T.C.(C) No. 299/2017, SLP(C) No. 37085/2017, T.C.(C) No. 307/2017, W.P.(C) No. 22/2018, W.P.(C) No. 441/2018, MA 1297/2018 in T.C.(C) No. 92/2017, IA No.62647/2018, CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1200/2018 in T.C.(C) No. 58/2017, IA No.74423/2018, Diary No. 22644-2018 , IA No.87812/2018 and IA No.87813/2018, Diary No. 22656-2018, IA No.87479/2018, IA No.87481/2018, Diary No. 22921-2018, IA No.87636/2018, IA No.87634/2018 and IA No.87638/2018, CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1257/2018 in T.P.(C) No. 283/2017, Diary No. 23957-2018, Diary No. 24620-2018, Diary No. 27543-2018, CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.972 OF 2018 IN SLP(C) No.10468/18 (ITEMNO. 301), (I.A.NO.87427/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION), (I.A.NO. 87424/2018 – INTERVENTION APPLICATION), (I.A.NO. 106191/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT), (I.A.NO. 90502/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT), SLP (C) NO. 10674/2018 (ITEM NO. 301.1), SLP(C) No. 10675/2018 (ITEM NO. 301.2), SLP(C) No. 12891-12893/2018 (XI) (ITEM NO. 301.3) and I.R. and IA No.72240/2018, SLP(C) No. 15699/2018 (ITEM NO. 301.4), DIARY NO.15295/2018 (ITEM NO. 303), DIARY NO.14629/2018 (ITEM NO. 303.1), MA.1993/2018 IN T.C.(C) NO.210/2017 (ITEM NO. 303.2), MA.1960/2018 IN T.C.(C) NO.293/2017 (ITEM NO. 303.3), DIARY NO.22993/2018 (ITEM NO. 303.4), W.P.(C) NO.913/2018 (ITEM NO. 303.5), T.C. (C) NO.53/2018 (ITEM NO. 303.6)
Decided On : 14-08-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. V. Shekhar, Sr. Adv., Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, AAG, Mr. Kamlendra K. Mishra, Adv., Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Adv., Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, Adv., Mr. Pradeep Misra, Adv., Mr. Pallav Sishodia, Sr. Adv., Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, Adv., Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Yashpal Dhingra, Adv., Mr. Krishna M. Singh, Adv., Mr. Rajiv Kumar,Adv., Mr. Vivekanand Rana, Adv., Mr. Danish Zubair Khan, AOR, Mr. Dushyant Dave, Sr. Adv., Mr. Krishna M. Singh, Adv., Mr. Rajivkumar, AOR, Mr. S. R. Setia, Adv., Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv., Ms. Indira Jaising, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anand Nandan, Adv., Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR, Mr. Avijit Mishra,Adv., Mr. Piyush Sharma,Adv., Mr. Saurav Mishra, Adv., Mr. Arvind Gupta, Adv., Mr. Pranay Kumar Mohapatra, AOR, Mr. Ranjit Kumar Sharma,AOR, Mr. Anuj Bhandari, AOR, Mr. Yashodhar Pandey, Adv., Ms. Anuradha Mishra, Adv., Mr. Vandit Mishra, Adv., Ms. Jahnvi Sharma, Adv., For M/s Anuradha & Associates, Mr. Rakesh Mishra, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Kumar Dwivedi, Adv., Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv., Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi,Adv., Ms. Vani Vyas, Adv., Mr. Mohit Kaushik, Adv., Mr. Ravi Chandra Prakash, Adv., Mr. Gurudatta Ankolekar, AOR, Ms. Shiva Vijaya Kumar, Adv., Mr. Neelkanth Dnyaneshwar Aher, Adv., M/s Mukesh Kumar Singh & Co., Mr. C. B. Gururaj, Adv., Mr. Nitesh M. Patel, Adv., Mr. Prakash Ranjan Nayak, Adv., Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv., Mr. Ram Anugrah Singh, Adv., Mr. Raj Singh Rana, Adv., Mr. Anurag Dubey, Adv., Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Adv., Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey,Adv., Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv., Ms. Shuchi Singh, Adv., Mr. Krishna Kant Dubey, Adv., Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR, Mr. Divyakant Lahoti,AOR, Mr. Adesh Kumar, Adv., Ch. L. Sarveswar, Adv., Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv., Mr. Aswathi M.K., Adv., Mr. Amit Bose,Adv., Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma,Adv., Mr. S.K. Rajora,Adv., Mr. M.A. Chinnasamy,Adv., Ms. Manju Sharma Jetly, AOR, Mr. Umang Shankar, AOR, Mr. Anirudh Sanganeria,AOR, Mr. Praveen Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Adv., Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, AOR, Mr. Kislay Komal, Adv., Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv., Mr. Rakesh Chaurasiya, Adv., Ms. Amrita, Adv., Ms. Shalu Sharma, AOR, Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv., Mr. Madhumay Misra, Adv., Ms. Shreya Mishra, Adv., Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Adv., Mr. Satyajeet Kumar, AOR., Mr. Devesh Kumar Tripathi, AOR, M/s Ravi Chandra Prakash & Co., Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv., Mr. Siddharth Dave, Adv., Mr. Susheel Tomar, Adv., Mr. Rajesh Srivastav, AOR, Mr. Balraj Dewan, Adv., Ms. Ritu Rastogi, Adv., Ms. Sasmita Tripathy, Adv., Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Adv., Mr. R.C. Kaushik, AOR, Mr. Mrinmay Bhattmewara, Adv., Mr. Ashish Sharma, Adv., Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv., Mr. Manendra Nath Rai, AOR, Mr. Praveen Chaturvedi, AOR, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dwivedi, Adv., Mr. Satyam Pandey, Adv., Mr. Vivek Tewari, Adv., Mr. Baijnath Prasad Pathak, Adv., Mohd. Muztaba, Adv., Dr. Vinod Kumar Tewari, AOR, Mr. Praveen Jain, AOR, Ms. Anu Gupta,Adv., Ms. Gouri Karuna Das Mohanti, Adv., Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR, Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, AOR, Mr. Dhananjai Jain, AOR, Mr. Sanjeev Malhotra, AOR, Mr. Sanjay Jain,AOR, Mr. Kedar Nath Tripathy, Adv., Mr. Anoop G. Chaudhari, Sr. Adv., Ms. June Chaudhari, Sr. Adv., Mr Prabhat Kumar Rai, Adv., Mr. Christopher Dsouza,AOR, Mr. Chandan Kumar Mandal, AOR, Ms. K. Sarada Devi, AOR, Mr. Avinash Sharma,AOR, Mr. F.A. Khan, Adv., Mr. Yadav Narender Singh, AOR, Mr. R. D. Upadhyay, AOR, Mr. Gyan Prakash Srivastava, AOR, Mr. Akshay Verma, AOR, Mr. Vinay Garg, AOR, Mr. Abhijat P. Medh, AOR, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Dubey,AOR, Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, AOR, Mr. K.K. Mohan, AOR, Mr. Amol Chitale,Adv., Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, AOR, Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR, Mr. Niraj Kushan Kaul, Sr.Adv., Mr. Sumit Kumar, AOR, Mr. Alok Kumar Misra, Adv., Mr. Ashutosh Lal,Adv., Mr. Manoj Kumar Shukla, Adv., Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Adv., Mr. A. K. Sharma, Adv., Mr. Sudeep Kumar,Adv., Ms. Pallavi Pratap,Adv., Mr. Vishnu Shankar Jain, AOR, Mr. Hemal Kiritkumar Sheth, AOR, Ms. Susmita Lal, AOR, Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, AOR, Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR, Ms. Pooja,Adv., Mr. Ravi S. Jha,Adv., Mr. Lakshmi Raman Singh, AOR, Mr. Anis Ahmed Khan, AOR, Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad, AOR, Mr. Nischal Kumar Neeraj, AOR, Mr. Alok Shukla, AOR, Ms. Kausar Raza Faridi, Adv., Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Sanjay Rastogi, Adv., Mr. Jugal Kishore Gupta, Adv., Mr. Mark A. Biswas, Adv., Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR, Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Adv., Ms. Shama Sharma, Adv., Mr. Chandan Kumar, Adv., Mr. Rajmala Dohare, Adv., Mr. S. K. Tripathi, Adv., Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR, Mr. Raju Sonkar, Adv., Mr. V. P. Pandey, Adv., Mr. Siddharth, AOR, Mr. Rajesh Goyal, Adv., Mr. Yashraj Singh Deora, AOR, Mr. Shyam Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR

The decision of the Expert Committee was made final, and any benefit accruing from it was limited to those who raised the challenge.

Headnote:
faulty chips - physical efficiency test - [Act Section List] - The court disposed of the application stating that no injustice has been done to the applicants as further verification through CCTV footage was conducted. The court declined to consider the matter on merits at this stage.
Fact of the Case:

The applicants were provided faulty chips during the physical efficiency test. The state submitted that further verification through CCTV footage was conducted and no injustice was done to the applicants. The applicants were not permitted to participate in the written examination.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that no injustice was done to the applicants as further verification through CCTV footage was conducted. The court declined to consider the matter on merits at this stage.
Issues: Dispute on the question of wrong or key answer being incorrect. Some cases had already gone to the High Court and some were pending.
Ratio Decidendi: The disputes raised in the petitions/applications were directed to be referred to an Expert Committee for consideration and decision. The decision of the Expert Committee was made final, and any benefit accruing from it was limited to those who raised the challenge.
Final Decision: All the petitions/applications were disposed of with directions to refer the disputes to an Expert Committee, whose decision would be final and limited to those who raised the challenge.

ORDER :

I.A. NOS.76673/2017 IN SLP(C) No.16432/2017 & I.A. NO.138528/2017 in T.C. No.83/2017

1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants and the learned Additional Advocate General of the State of U.P.

2. The complaint is that they were provided faulty chips during the physical efficiency test but learned counsel appearing for the State submit that though the chips were faulty a further verification through the CCTV footage was conducted and, therefore, no injustice has been done to the applicants. In any case they have not been permitted to participate in the written examination. Since much water has flown down the bridge, we do not find it appropriate to consider the matter on merits at this stage.

3. Accordingly, no further orders are required in these applications.

DIARY NO.6207/2018, T.C. (C) NOS. 243/2017, 81/2017, 70/2017, 79/2017, 137/2017, 143/2017, 175/2017, 182/2017, 86/2017, 101/2017, 138/2017, 150/2017, 77/2017, 163/2017 & 108/2017, I.A. NO.112153/2018 IN SLP(C) No.16723/2017, I.A. NO.66093/2017 & I.A. NO.116082/17 BOTH IN SLP(C) No.16432/2017, I.A. NO.64944/2017 IN SLP(C) No.16432/2017.

4. These petitions/applications pertain to dispute on the question either being wrong or key answer otherwise being incorrect. We find that some of them have already gone to the High

Court and some petitions are pending in the High Court.

5. All these petitions/applications are disposed of, if not already disposed of, with the following directions:

6. The disputes raised in these petitions/applications shall be referred to an Expert Committee forthwith and the Expert Committee shall consider the same and take an appropriate decision, in the light also of the judgment/orders passed by the High Court. This exercise shall be completed within three weeks.

7. We make it clear that the decision thus taken by the Expert Committee shall be final. It is further made clear that benefit, if any, accruing from the decision of the Expert Committee shall be limited only to those petitioners/applicants/intervenors/respondents, who have raised such a challenge. The Expert Committee shall also include three special experts, one of whom shall be expert in Hindi language, in addition to those who constituted the original committee, in case those persons are available.

8. All the petitioners/applicants/intervenors/respondents are directed to serve an additional copy of the petition to the Secretary, Police Recruitment Board, positively within one week

from today.

9. The Committee shall also examine the grievance regarding non evaluation of any answers, in case they have raised such issues in Court.

T.C.(C) NOS.84/2017, 115/2017, 291/2017, 248/2017, 96/2017, 177/2017 & 280/2017.

10. These petitions/applications pertain to certain disputes on the non-production of the caste certificate/domicile certificate within time. It is the case of the candidates that they had forwarded certain information, which has been found to be insufficient and they were required to produce fresh certificate/original certificate etc. It is also submitted that at the initial stages, they were permitted to participate in the process on the basis that they belong to a particular reserved category.

11. One can understand that a person acquires a qualification after the cut off date and claims he/she is qualified. That is not the case here. It is a case where a person belongs to a particular category and that certificate is produced belatedly and their candidature had already been scrutinized on the basis of the particulars already furnished by the candidate that he/she belonged to a particular category.

12. In such circumstances, we are of the view that such candidates, in case they produce the original certificate, as required by the Selection Board regarding their caste or domicile within three weeks from today before the Recruitment Board, they shall be entitled to participate in the selection process. Ordered accordingly. We make it clear that this order is limited only to those ca

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis