JUDGMENT :

(Suneet Kumar, J.)

1. Heard Shri Shyamal Narain, assisted by Shri Ravi Prakash Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Manish Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. Petitioner/original applicants, herein, are challenging the judgment and order dated 1 May 2018, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (for short ‘Tribunal’), whereby, their candidature for appointment on Group-D post has been rejected.

3. Railway Recruitment Cell, North Central Railway, Allahabad (for short ‘RRC’), invited applications from eligible candidates for recruitment to Group-D posts, i.e., Khalasi, Helper, Trackman, Peon, Parcel Porter, Safaiwala, etc. under North Central Railway, vide advertisement No. 01/2013, dated 27 July, 2013.

4. Petitioners appeared for the written test and were declared successful. The select list was published on the official website of R.R.C. on 15 December 2015. Thereafter, petitioners appeared for the Physical Examination Test (for short ‘P.E.T’.), held between 10 March 2015 to 14 March 2015, finally, 2609 candidates, including the petitioners came to be declared successful in the P.E.T. Thereafter, all the candidates, including, petitioners were called for verification of the documents and medical examination. The select list published on the website on 15 December 2015, was accompanied by a note running in fourteen paragraphs. The paragraph relevant for the purposes of this case is extracted:

“During various stages of scrutiny and Document Verification 339 candidates found indulged in impersonation. It is roved following extant procedure that these candidates did not appeared inn the written examination but some one else appeared in place of these candidates or handwriting/thumb impression of these candidates did not match in various documents. Hence apart from cancellation of candidature of the 339 candidates they are being debarred from all Railways examination through out Indian Railways as well as criminal case may also be registered against them on case to case basis.”

5. The candidature of the petitioners was rejected with the remarks ‘handwriting/thumb impression mismatch’.

6. Aggrieved, petitioners approached the Tribunal by filing original application, being O.A. No. 1789 of 2015, Vijay Pal and others versus Union of India and others, which came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 1 May 2018.

7. During pendency of the original application, an interim order dated 31 December 2015, was granted by the Tribunal directing the respondents to keep 23 Group-D posts vacant. The operative portion of the order is extracted:

“Having heard learned counsel for both sides, it appears that the grounds for rejection are stigmatic and therefore some opportunity ought to have been given to the applicants before rejecting their candidature by the respondents. Therefore, prima facie, a case for interim protection is made out. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to keep 23 posts vacant till the next date.

If the facts are otherwise, the respondents are at liberty to file stay vacation application.”

8. During pendency of the original application, petitioners came to be issued memorandum dated 23 January 2016, stating therein, that though the candidature of the petitioners was already cancelled, however, petitioners were called upon by the respondents to show cause as to why they may not be debarred from all future R.R.C./R.R.B. examinations, further, why criminal case may not be instituted against them for indulging in malpractice to procure Government job by fraud and misrepresentation.

9. The notice alleged that the petitioners had resorted to impersonation, further, it was alleged that there was mismatch in the handwriting, and/or, thumb impression of the candidates. In other words, allegation against the petitioners was that they have resorted, by securing the services of someone else, in the written test on their behalf. The allegation levelled i