The court ruled that the selection process for Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers was fraudulent, violating Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution, and directed a fresh review based on actual marks.

ORDER :

1. Challenging the selection of candidates and their appointments as Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers under the first respondent pursuant to the Recruitment Notice 2014 vide Advertisement No. 01-05/MTC/2014 dated 02.11.2014 issued by the first respondent and consequently to direct the first respondent to redraw the selection list based on the true marks scored by the candidates in the selection and consider the case of the petitioners for such selection accordingly and further to make appointments afresh replacing the already appointed candidates as Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers and further to direct the second respondent to issue appropriate orders, directing all the recruitment authorities to publish in the advertisement itself for any selection for making public appointments, the procedure to be followed in the selection and to publish the results of any examination either oral or written conducted for such selection disclosing the name, age, community and marks scored in each examination by all the participants in the examinations conducted for the selection within a time frame as fixed by this Court and also to issue appropriate direction to the first respondent to pay adequate compensation to the petitioners as fixed by this Court for their non-selection as Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers for their illegal act, the Writ Petitions have been preferred by the petitioners.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The brief facts of the case is as follows:

The petitioners herein have completed their Diploma/Degree and one year apprenticeship under Transport Corporations/recognized workshops, qualifying them for appointment as Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers in the first respondent Corporation. The first respondent issued Advertisement No. 01-05/MTC/2014, calling for applications for various posts. The petitioners applied for the post of Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers and participated in the interview. However, they neither received selection order nor communication from the first respondent. In the meantime, the petitioners were summoned to the third respondent's office for an enquiry regarding CCB Cr. No. 441 of 2015 on 08.10.2020, 28.09.2020, and 08.10.2020. They participated in the enquiry, where the third respondent confirmed their participation in the selection for Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers under the first respondent. They were shown their answer sheets and their marks, as well as the marks of the selected candidates to the said post. The petitioners were shocked to find that their true interview marks were not considered for selection, whereas very low marks being falsely considered for selection. It reveals that the petitioners were intentionally refrained from getting appointment even though they have secured higher score than the selectees. Thus, the first respondent committed offences punishable under Sections 218, 409, 420 of IPC and criminal proceedings are ongoing on the third respondent's file. The petitioners believed non-selection as illegal and consequence of corruption. The first respondent fabricated false documents showing lower marks for the petitioners which resulted for their rejection. The petitioners also questioned about the non publication of mode of awarding marks for selection in the advertisement of the first respondent preventing the participants from knowing their marks and challenging the selection, if aggrieved. The results of oral tests and written examinations are not published, whereby the selection list alone was published allowing the authorities to carry out illegalities and to appoint the candidates who secured lower marks than the petitioners which amounts to violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

4. Aggrieved over the same, the present Writ Petitions have been filed by the petitioners herein.

5. Since the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions are one and the same, they were taken up together and disposed of by way of a common order.

6. Argume