Expert opinion alone insufficient for candidature cancellation/debarment without providing copy and hearing opportunity, violating natural justice.

ORDER

Per: Shri Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)

1.The present OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 by seeking the following reliefs:

“8.1 That your Lordship may graciously be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 02.02.2018 as contain in Annexure A/1 concerning the order of cancellation of the candidature of the applicant as well as debarment from the future exams and employment in the railways of the applicant.

8.2 That the respondent be further directed to consider the applicant for the post of a loco pilot as applied by the applicant. 8.3 That the respondent be directed to exclude the name of the applicant from the debarment list of the Railways.

8.4 That the respondent be further direct to grant all consequential benefits including seniority in the favour of the applicant.

8.5 That any other relief or reliefs including the cost of . Brief facts of the case as stated by the applicant are that in pursuance of Employment Notice No.01/2014 published on 18.01.2014, the applicant applied for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot and Technician category. On 15.06.2014, he appeared in the written examination. On 02.08.2018, the result of written test was declared and the applicant was found qualified for Technician category and thereafter, he was called for document verification, which was carried out on 06.11.2017.

2.1 Thereafter, the respondents obtained fingerprint expert opinion on 07.12.2017, in which, it has been opined by the Senior Fingerprint Expert that the left thumb impressions (LTIs) on the document verification form, declaration form and paragraph writing form (all during document verification) are not identical to the LTI found on the OMR sheet. It application form, attendance sheet and admit card for the written test were recorded as blurred. Based on the aforesaid opinion, notice for debarring from examination of all Recruitment Railway Boards for life time was issued to the applicant on 10.01.2018, to which, reply dated 24.01.2018 has been submitted denying all the allegations levelled against the applicant and he has further stated that thumb impression is also taken on application form, written attendance sheet, admit card, OMR sheet, however, it has been intimated that the thumb impression of only OMR sheet is not matching with the impression taken at the time of document verification which means that the thumb impression on other documents provided at the time of filling of the form as well as the thumb impression collected on the attendance sheet during the exam matches.

2.2 It is further stated that signature Id is also checked at the examination. However, by impugned communication dated 02.02.2018 Annexure A-1 ( ), the candidature of the applicant is cancelled against the Employment Notice No.01/2014 and also debarred the applicant from examinations of all Railway Recruitment Boards and also appointment on Railways for life time. Thereafter, the applicant has submitted letter for reconsideration of his case and re-verify his fingerprint and match the same with other documents vide letter dated 20.02.2018. However, vide letter dated 25.06.2018 issued by the respondent No.3, it is informed that the representation of the applicant has already been examined and reply to the same was already provided to the applicant.

2.3 Therefore, impugned communication is challenged by the present applicant on the ground that the entire action of the respondents is rules and principles of natural justice and liable to the set aside.

2.4 It is also contended that the applicant did not use any illegal means in the examination conducted by the respondents authorities. It is further contended that the respondents authorities did not consider the reply provided by the applicant, neither they considered the fact that the applicant had affixed his fingerprint impres