Dismissed

Ponung Tayeng v. The State of Ap and Others

Gauhati HC2 Mar 2022WP(C)/3/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench dismissed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a recruitment result for Nursing Officers and the order to re-conduct the exam due to allegations of malpractice. The Court held that the cancellation could not be faulted as it eroded public confidence, and the petitioners suffered no irreparable prejudice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order cancelling the recruitment result and advertisement for re-examination dismissed.

Ponung Tayeng Vs The State of Ap and Others — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC040000092021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 3/2021

¶5

1:Ponung Tayeng

¶6

D/O SHRI JAYONG TAYENG, RESIDENT OF SIGAR VILLAGE PO/PS MEBO DISTRICT-EAST SIANG, AP.

¶7

2: BOYEM LITIN

¶8

D/O SHRI RATSER LITIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NGORLUNG PO/PS RUKSIN DISTRICT EAST SIANG AP.

¶9

3: OSI SIRAM

¶10

D/O SHRI TAPIR SIRAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE YAGRUNG PO YAGRUNG PS PASIGHAT DISTRICT EAST SIANG AP.

¶11

4: MISS MILI NGUPOK

¶12

D/O SHRI ATO NGUPOK RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JIA-II PO/PS ROING DIST.LOWER DIBANG VALLEY AP.

¶13

5: MISS ELOTI METO D/O LT. KATO METO RESIDENT OF VILLAGEMAYU-II PO /PS ROING DISTRICT LOWER DIBANG VALLEY

¶14

Page No.# 2/8

¶15

AP.

¶16

6: MISS RIYA MOLLIK D/O SHRI SUBAS MOLLIK PERMANENT ADDRESS VILLAGE LALCHIT NAGAR PO/PS CHAPAKHOWA DIST. TINSUKIA ASSAM. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILLAGE TELLULANG PO/PS TEZU DIST. LOHIT AP VERSUS 1:The State of AP and Others REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF AP, ITANAGAR. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-CUM-CHAIRMAN DHS LOHIT DISTRICT TEZU AP. 3:THE SECRETARY (HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE) GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR. 4:THE MISSION DIRECTOR NRHM GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR. 5:THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (DMO) TEZU LOHIT DISTRICT AP. 6:THE OFFICER-IN CHARGE OF THE SIC (VIG). GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : Chorpok Modi

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶19

Page No.# 3/8

¶20

BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 02.03.2022:

¶23

Heard Mr. C. Modi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. R. Basar, learned Govt. advocate appearing for respondent no.1, Mr. T. Tagum, learned standing counsel for the Health Department, representing respondent nos. 2 to 5 and Mr. O. Pada, learned standing counsel for the SIC (Vig.), representing respondent no.6.

¶24

Shorn of unnecessary details, in brief, the case of the 6 petitioners herein is that pursuant to an advertisement dated 16.07.2020 by which applications were invited for filling up 10 posts of contractual Nursing Officer from Lohit District, the petitioners had appeared in the written test held on 11.08.2020 and also appeared for basic- skill test held on 12.08.2020. The names of the petitioners appeared in the list of selected candidates which was declared on 12.08.2020. However, thereafter, an audio clip alleging malpractices of some candidates for getting appointment in the contractual post of Nursing Officer in Lohit District became widely viral and was also published in various newspapers circulating in the State. Pursuant to the same, SIC (Vig.) PS FIR No. 1820 under Section 120B IPC read with Sections 7, 8, 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered. These subsequent events resulted in a direction being issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Health and Family Welfare Department on 26.10.2020 to the Deputy

¶25

Page No.# 4/8

¶26

Commissioner, Lohit District, amongst others, to issue an official cancellation order and to re-conduct the recruitment only for those candidates who had appeared in the cancelled recruitment process. This was followed by an order dated 06.11.2020 by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohit District to cancel the result declared on 19.08.2020 and to re-conduct the recruitment examination only for those candidates who had appeared in the last recruitment examination. Thereafter, an advertisement was issued on 12.11.2020 for re-conducting the examination. However, due to ensuing Panchayat Raj Institution Election and enforcement of model code of conduct, the proposed re-examination was postponed by order dated 27.11.2020, to be held after 10.01.2021 by providing that no fresh applications shall be entertained after last date of submission, i.e. 27.11.2020. The cancellation of the result and the proposed re-examination has been assailed in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶27

By referring to the additional affidavit filed by the petitioners on 30.03.2021, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that only one person was arrested in connection with the aforesaid vigilance case and accordingly, it is submitted that the respondent authorities ought not to have cancelled the examination for a solitary incident of malpractice in the conduct of examination.

¶28

Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the Health Department, by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5 has submitted that the investigation carried out so

¶29

Page No.# 5/8

¶30

far reveals that one candidate is alleged to have paid a sum of Rs.2.00 lakh to the recruiting officer through a middleman and the prime accused who was the key person in the recruitment process has been arrested by the investigating agency. It is also submitted that the investigation also reveals that the answer scripts of some selected candidates were found to contain over-writing and in certain answers against objective type questions more than one tick mark were also found. Hence, at the time of filing their affidavit-in-opposition, the investigation was pending, awaiting opinion of the experts. Hence, it is submitted that the manner in which examination result was manipulated had vitiated the entire recruitment process and had eroded public confidence on the sanctity of the recruitment process and therefore, the cancellation of the examination process and the result declared on 12.08.2020 and subsequent reexamination ought not to be interfered with. It is submitted that his current verbal instruction is to the effect that 56 candidates of Lohit District had participated in the written test held on 11.08.2020 and 28 candidates had cleared the said test, who were called for the competency skill test held on 12.08.2020 and that out of those candidates, 10 candidates were selected vide result sheet declared on 12.08.2020. It is further submitted that the result of the re-examination that was held could not be declared in view of interim order dated 31.03.2021 passed by this Court in I.A.(C) 57(AP)/2021 in connection with this writ petition.

¶31

At the outset, the Court is appalled to notice that the petitioner in his additional affidavit has not only annexed the copy of FIR, but has also annexed (1) arrest-cum- inspection memo dated 21.08.2020, (2) two accused challan, (3) statement of accused person recorded by the Investigating Officer,

¶32

Page No.# 6/8

¶33

(4) memo of arrest that was made on 19.08.2020, (5) statement of three witnesses. Similarly, in their affidavit-in-opposition, the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5 have also annexed the status report of investigation carried out so far which was issued by the Superintendent of Police, SIC (Vig.) to the Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department. The information so produced and circulated from the end of the investigating agency appears to be as good as advertising the manner of investigation carried on, which would amount to alerting all the prospective accused persons about the investigation carried out so far and the nature of investigation which is further proposed, as if no confidentiality is required to be maintained regarding the nature of investigation being conducted by the supposedly elite investigating agency of the State.

¶34

Upon examination of the materials available on record, the Court finds that as the recruiting officer as well as one candidate have both been arrested. The arrested candidate had allegedly managed to secure sixth position in the result sheet declared on 12.08.2020. Therefore, the Court has no doubt that in public perception, the credibility of the conduct of examination in a fair and transparent manner is bound to erode. Hence, the Court finds that under the aforesaid circumstances, the cancellation of the examination by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohit District as instructed by the Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh cannot be faulted with.

¶35

Moreover, as the re-examination was ordered to be held only amongst the qualified candidates who had appeared in written examination on 11.08.2020, the petitioners have not been found to suffer any irreparable

¶36

Page No.# 7/8

¶37

prejudice. The Court further finds that no legal or fundamental rights of the petitioners have been violated. Therefore, (1) the cancellation of the result dated 12.08.2020 of selected candidates for the post of Nursing Officers in Lohit District vide impugned order dated 06.11.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohit District (Annexure-IX), and (2) the advertisement dated 12.11.2020 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohit District to re-conduct the recruitment examination only for those candidates who appeared in the recent recruitment exam does not warrant any interference of this Court. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed.

¶38

However, before parting with the records, it is seen that as per notice dated 11.08.2020 issued by the District Medical Officer, Lohit District, the names of 28 candidates appeared in the list of qualified candidates in written exams held on 11.08.2020, but as per foot note of the order dated 12.11.2020, copies of the said advertisement dated 12.11.2020 issued vide memo no. L/NHM/05/2020-21/1287-1330 dated 13.11.2020 is found to be marked at serial no. 14 thereof to “All 29 candidates who appeared written exam on 11^th August/2020 at Amik Matai Vidya Mandir School, Tezu for information.” Therefore, before the results of the re-examination is declared, the Deputy Commissioner, Lohit District shall satisfy himself as to how from the list of 28 selected candidates reference was made to 29 candidates in the advertisement dated 12.11.2020 (Annexure-X) and record the same in the note sheet of the concerned file.

¶39

In respect of the observations made in paragraph 5, the learned

¶40

Page No.# 8/8

¶41

Govt. advocate shall transmit a downloaded copy of this order to the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶42

The parties are left to bear their own cost.

¶43

JUDGE

¶44

Comparing Assistant

Ponung Tayeng v. The State of Ap and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponung Tayeng v. The State of Ap and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amal Kanti Das Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Monwara Begum Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sohidul Islam Laskar and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

M/s Livi Enterprises Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

M/s Livi Enterprises Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

M/s Livi Enterprises Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.