duly constituted selection committee in between 02.09.1997 to 09.09.1997 and thereafter on 18.09.1997 select list has been published. In between undisputed position is that there has been order on behalf of State Government on 11.09.1997 restraining further selection and appointment in Revenue Department which has been received at Collectorate, Jaunpur on 20.09.1997 and thereafter order dated 24.09.1997 has been passed cancelling the selection proceedings. Order impugned proceeds to mention that selection proceedings have been stayed by the State Government and further District Magistrate proceeds to mention that in respect of present selection complaint have been received on account of which selection is vitiated and as such he feels that entire selection be carried out denovo. Original record in question has been produced. Reasons reflected from the record for cancelling selection is that there were protest in news paper against the selection which has been largely published, that there has been malpractice in the selection proceedings as such said selection is being cancelled. In case there has been protest and finger has been raised qua fairness of selection proceedings, then District Magistrate has got full authority to make inquiry in the matter in respect of genunity of the complaint which were coming forward and thereafter formed his opinion based on the same. In the present case entire opinion has been formed by the District Magistrate only on the premises that complaints have been received as such proceedings are vitiated and as per rule of fair play entire selection proceedings be undertaken denovo. Selection proceedings are not be cancelled lightly. In case there were complaints then qua the same inquiry ought to have been made instead of placing reliance on newspaper report and report ought to have submitted. In the present case before forming said opinion proper homework has not been done by the authority concerned and before this Court it has been suggested that entire selection proceedings is out come of manipulation, inasmuch as 400 candidates have been examined on each particular date which is impossible and qua which no record is available. In the impugned order no such reason has been given, it is for the authority concerned to see in objective manner and take decision on the material available on record as to whether malpractice has been there in the said selection proceedings and element of fairness is lacking and missing. In the present case requisite exercise has not been done and on mere complaint being received on the basis of newspaper report without taking any exercise cancelling the said selection proceedings,is unsustainable and cannot be subscribed.
