The main legal point established in the judgment is that the government's decision to relax the physical test standards for the petitioners' appointment, as revealed by the information obtained under the Right to Information Act, influenced the court's finding that the termination was illegal, arbitrary, and mala fide.

ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY, J.

1. Right to Information Act heralded a new era of transparency and accountability in the working of public authority. The information under the Right to Information Act has exposed falsehood of many authorities in the decision making process. It is the information obtained by the petitioners of this case under the Right to Information Act on 20th of May, 2010 that proved to be a boon for these petitioners and they could be able to substantiate before the Division Bench hearing Civil Review No. 226 of 2012, that the counter affidavit filed in this case was result of misrepresentation and as such there was complete failure of justice. The Division Bench on consideration of the noting of file in connection with relaxation of the rigorous physical test, allowed the review petition vide judgment and order dated 28.7.2014 passed in Civil Review No. 226 of 2012 and restored CWJC No. 5631 of 1999 to its original file for disposal. The relevant part of the order dated 28.7.2014 is axiomatic and for ready reference the same is reproduced as follows:-

“Paragraph-12 of the impugned judgment is self eloquent of the opinion formed by the writ court that the termination order of the petitioners did not warrant interference because the relaxation in physical test was never approved by the cabinet. The opinion expressed by the Bench is on the statement of the State counsel recorded in paragraph-5 of the judgment that no approval was obtained from the council of Ministers. It is in this backdrop that the writ court taking note of the judgment passed in CWJC No. 1332 of 1990 held that any relaxation in the physical test could be made only after obtaining approval of the council of Ministers but no such approval was obtained in the present case. Such is also the observation of the bench in paragraphs-7, 8 and 10 of the judgment. It is thus manifest that the writ court had based its opinion on the stand taken by the State that there was no cabinet approval to the relaxation of physical test in case of the petitioners as required in terms of the judgment and order passed in CWJC No. 1332 of 1990 and since the appointments had been provided to the petitioners in complete disregard of this requirement hence the termination did not warrant interference.

The writ court was considering the termination of the petitioners in the backdrop of the pleadings and documents as available before the writ court. In view of the stand taken by the respondents regarding absence of approval by the cabinet with nothing to challenge such submission, obviously there could not be any other conclusion. But the petitioners by this review petition have tried to shift this opinion and their prayer is exclusively founded on the information derived under the Right to Information Act and placed at Annexure-1 to the review application. The file noting present at Annexure-1 of the review application reflects that following the appointment of these petitioners, there were other claimants to such relaxation and the respondents while admitting that the appointment of the petitioners had been made after obtaining approval of the Government on relaxation in physical test standards, in the light of the judgment and order passed in CWJC No. 1332 of 1990, sought opinion from the learned Advocate General as to whether similar relaxation could be granted to the others also. It is in the light of the opinion received from the Advocate General that the department declined relaxation in the physical test as granted to the petitioners to the other claimants. The file noting as appearing at page 23 and 24 of the review petition are very relevant to the issue raised in this application and paragraph 3 thereof reads as follows:

^^3- egkf/koDrk ds ijke'kZ ds fpfUgr va'k ^d^ ls Li"V gS fd fu;qfDr ds lEcU/k esa ljdkj dks fdlh izdkj dh f'kfFkyrk cjrus dh vko';drk ugha gSA fiNys ekeys esa ljdkj n~okjk 'kkjhfjd tkWap esa f'kfFkyrk cjrrsa gq, ¼vLi"V½ vo'; fn;k x;k Fkk fdUrq ;g