Allegations of corruption in the selection process for public employment do not invariably require prior approval for investigation under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act when they are not related to public service duties.

JUDGMENT

The prayers in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are as follows:-

“1. Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ order or direction, directing the 1^st, 2^nd and 8^th respondent to constitute a special investigation team and to conduct investigation in the matter stated in Exhibit P9, in a time bound manner and in supervision of this Hon’ble Court.

2. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction, directing the 8^th respondent to take appropriate legal actions based on the matters raised in Exhibit P9.

3. This Hon’ble Court may grant leave to the petitioners from filing the translation of the vernacular documents produced with the writ petition.

4. Issue appropriate order or directing that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The petitioners were the applicants for the post of sweeper-cum-cleaner in the Cochin University of Science and Technology. The notification for the said post was published in 2008 and written examination was conducted in 2010. A short list of 750 candidates was published based on the result of the examination. The selection process was delayed indefinitely due to the pendency of certain litigations before this Court.

3. A new syndicate took charge of the University on November 2016. The syndicate proceeded with the selection process. Final ranked list was published on 28.12.2018. Based on the final ranked list 97 persons were appointed for the post.

4. The petitioners alleged that there was corruption and malpractice in this selection process. It is alleged that even one month prior to the publication of the ranked list, the names of candidates who would be selected came to be leaked based on certain communication between some ofÏce bearers of an employees association and one of the candidates who appeared in the selection process.

5. The Crux of the allegation in the Writ Petition is narrated in Paragraphs 3 to 6 of the Writ Petition which are extracted below:-

“3.The final ranked list of the candidates has to be prepared based on the marks obtained by them in the written test as well in the interview. Maximum marks that can be granted by the interview board to a candidate were 20. Accordingly the interview was conducted by the selection committee in the month of April to July of 2018. Prior to the interview, the ruling political party leaders have provided to the selection committee a list of candidates who must be appointed by giving maximum marks in the interview and bringing them in the top of the final ranked list. Keeping it in mind, the new selection committee has committed fraud and grave malpractice in the interview process. They have granted maximum marks out of 20 to the persons whom they have pre-decided to give employment, though they have less marks in written examination. On the other hand, lesser marks were given to the eligible candidates who got higher marks in the written examination. So the selection committee has misused their position and has committed fraud and malpractice in the interview process and made appointments of undeserved candidates supporting their political line by granting more marks in the interview than what they actually deserved. A true copy of the consolidated mark sheet prepared by the selection committee based on the interview conducted from the period from 16/4/2018 to 9/7/2018 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit P1. A true copy of the ranked list dated 28/12/2018 published by the 5 th respondent is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit P2. From Exhibit P1 it is evident that ineligible candidates having lesser marks in the written examination were given higher marks to give