Allegations of using unfair means in examinations require specific substantiating evidence; mere suspicion is insufficient for action against candidates.

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J): -

Since a common question of facts and law arises in the present O.A.s, they are being disposed of through this common order. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted from O.A. No. 68/2025 with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. By way of the present O.A. filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: -

“(a) call for the records of the case and

(b) quash and set aside impugned order dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure A/1) along with show cause notice dated 16.10.2024 (Annexure A/2) and;

(c) direct the respondents to forthwith appoint the applicant to the post(s) in pay band 5200-20200 with Grade Pay Rs. 1800/- (pre-revised) pursuant to applicant’s selection towards the advertisement issued in the year 2014

(d) accord all consequential benefits including seniority and monetary benefits

(e) Award costs of the proceedings; and

(f) Pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice in favour of the applicants.”

3. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted as under:

3.1. In response to employment notification (Annexure-A/3) issued by RRC, NR in the year 2014 to fill up various posts in Pay Band Rs. 5200-20200 with Grade Pay Rs. 1800/- the applicant (SC candidate) being fully eligible, duly applied for the same and participated in the recruitment process on the allotted Roll No. 50250644 and Control No. 13410226. He himself appeared in the written examination in 2014. However, his result was withheld and he was constrained to file O.A. No. 1000/2015 and the said O.A. was disposed by this Tribunal vide order dated 17.03.2015 (Annexure-A/4), at the admission stage, by issuing directions to disclose his marks and if he has secured more marks than the last selected candidate, he shall be allowed to participate in the physical examination scheduled from 23.03.2015 to 25.03.2015.

3.2 Later, Hon'ble Delhi High Court issued order dated 28.07.2015 in W.P.(C) No. 4945/2015 (Annexure-A/5) requiring preservation of the answer sheets and answer keys. Pursuant thereto, RRC issued order dated 12.08.2015 (Annexure- A/6) where operative para reads as follows:-

"In compliance to the above orders, which have been received in this office on 06.08.15, undersigned has gone through the case and notes as under:

1. You were a candidate in the above referred examination held in the month of November 2014 with Control No. 16410226 and Roll No. 50250644.

2. The result of the above examination was declared on 20.02.2015 under three categories i.e. "Shortlisted for PET', "Not Shortlisted for PET", and "Result Withheld" candidates.

3. It is advised that marks of the candidates are disclosed only after the process of Physical Efficiency Test (PET) is over. Cut off marks for the "shortlisted" candidates for/after PET already been displayed on the RRC website and now that PET event has culminated and, Respondent are now not precluded from disclosing the marks of “Not Shortlisted” candidates for PET who are otherwise not grouped by computer software/system in the “Rejected” category for mismatch of Control No./Roll No. or who have circumvented the Employment Notification conditions etc.

4. Your result was shown as "Withheld" candidate on the ground of using unfair means during the examination. Your case along with other similarly placed candidates was further processed and investigated by a apex agency of Govt. of India having expertise in the field as also by using high technological methods. Based on the reports of Investigation, it has been proved that you have used unfair means in the examination