The court upheld the dismissal of a public servant for misconduct, emphasizing integrity and impartiality in public service and clarifying standards for judicial review of disciplinary actions.

JUDGMENT :

Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.

1. The present writ petition challenges the legality and propriety of the memorandum of charge sheet dated 08.04.2019, the enquiry report dated 13.08.2019, and the final order of punishment dated 17.02.2020, all issued and/or passed in connection with a disciplinary proceeding initiated against the petitioner. Additionally, the petitioner prays for a writ of certiorari to set aside and quash the said documents. The petitioner further seeks a writ of mandamus directing the concerned respondents to reinstate him to his previous position as Upper Division Assistant (UDA), with all consequential benefits, including back wages.

2. Before addressing the issue raised in this writ petition, it would be appropriate to refer to the essential facts, as outlined in the writ petition, which led to its institution, which are as follows:

i) The petitioner joined the Public Service Commission (in short, PSC) as a Lower Division Assistant (LDA) on 04.03.2005, having successfully cleared the Clerkship Examination, 2002. He was subsequently promoted to the post of Upper Division Assistant (UDA) in 2009 and was posted in the Confidential Section.

ii) The petitioner was assigned the tasks of certain rudimentary computer related jobs. The petitioner has been carrying out all those works assigned to him maintaining highest integrity and without any blemish.

iii) In 2017, the Public Service Commission (in short, PSC) undertook the responsibility of conducting the West Bengal Civil Service (WBCS) examination, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the examination) for recruitment to Group A, B, C, and D posts. The Main (written) examination consisted of eight papers, six of which were compulsory and the remaining two were optional papers, each carrying 200 marks.

iv) The examinations for the six compulsory papers were conducted over three consecutive days, namely 15.07.2017, 16.07.2017, and 17.07.2017. The examinations for the remaining two optional papers were held on a single day, i.e., 19.07.2017.

v) As per the applicable rules, candidates who appeared in all eight papers were eligible for consideration for Group A and B posts, whereas those who appeared only in the compulsory papers were considered for Group C and D posts.

vi) The petitioner, by his letter dated 17.01.2017, informed the Deputy Secretary, PSC, that his married sister, Smt. Somdatta Ganeriwala, would be appearing in the examination.

vii) Upon completion of the examination, the descriptive papers were evaluated by examiners appointed by the PSC, while the four MCQ-based OMR sheets were processed by WEBEL. The final compilation and tabulation of marks for all eight papers were completed and provided to WEBEL on 12.06.2018.

viii) The petitioner’s sister appeared only in the compulsory papers, thereby rendering herself eligible for consideration for Group C and D posts. Upon learning this fact, the petitioner was not assigned computer related tasks pertaining to the Group C and D posts. Instead, he was entrusted with certain computer related work relating to recruitment to the Group A and B posts. In addition to the petitioner, two other employees from the Confidential Section, Smt