In cases of widespread irregularities in selection processes, cancellation of entire selection is justified, as separation of affected candidates is not feasible.

JUDGMENT :

Sujoy Paul, ACJ.

WPCT 136 of 2019

Admitted facts:-

1. The admitted facts between the parties are that the petitioners pursuant to a selection notification dated 01.09.2008 appeared in the selection for the post of Apprentice Mechanics Inter Stage (Mechanical). The petitioners were declared successful in the said selection process. They joined the respective promotional posts and worked for about four years. However, pursuant to memorandum dated 10.02.2015 the said selection was cancelled by Railway Administration. It is admitted between the parties that said cancellation memorandum dated 10.02.2015 is founded upon the report of vigilance department and it is not in dispute that decision to cancel the selection was taken by the competent authority.

Contention of petitioners:-

2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that after cancellation of earlier notification dated 01.09.2008 by memorandum dated 10.02.2015, a new selection process for the said post began. The petitioners herein appeared in the fresh selection and out of five petitioners four have been selected. Shri Sailen Ghosh, applicant no.4 could not clear the subsequent selection. Shri Soumya Majumdar fairly urged that if petitioners succeed in the present petition, they will get seniority from the date of their original selection pursuant to the earlier notification dated01.09.2008. The learned senior counsel for these petitioners urged that the original selection held pursuant to notification dated 01.09.2008 in which petitioners were selected was called in question by certain persons in OA No. 1135 of 2011. The department filed its reply in the said case and stated in the reply dated 09.02.2012 that there was no flaw in the selection process. Thus, it was not open to the administration to cancel the entire selection. The bone of contention of learned senior counsel for petitioners is that in the instant case the persons who have committed irregularity/illegality etc. were identifiable and therefore action of cancelling the entire selection is bad in law. To bolster this submission, Shri Majumder placed heavy reliance on the finding of tribunal in Paragraph 8 (iv) where the tribunal recorded that upon accepting the report of vigilance, the CVC recommended major penalty proceedings against 12 junior engineers as well as the members of the selection committee. Thus, these delinquent employees were clearly identified who committed mal-practices in the selection process. To buttress this stand reliance is also placed on the finding of tribunal in internal page 38 wherein tribunal has given finding in relation to the connected OA No. 1706 of 2015, 1365 of 2015, 1432 of 2015 and 232 of 2016. It is urged that these applicants in those cases were the persons who allegedly committed misconduct and malpractices. Hence cancellation of entire selection is bad in law.

Stand of Department:-

3. Learned counsel for the Railway Administration supported the impugned order and urged that the action of cancelling the previous notification by memorandum dated 10.02.2015 is based on the report of vigilance which was duly examined and accepted by the competent authority. Thus no fault can be found in the impugned order. The nature of illegality and mal practice is so wide spread that the actual persons and beneficiaries cannot be identified and segregated. Hence the impugned order is justifiable.

Findings:-

4. The first contention of the Learned Senior Counsel Shri Soumya Maj