Allahabad HC Upholds Cancellation Of Appointment Of Asst Teachers Who Were Unfairly Awarded Higher Marks In Entrance Test, Imposes 5K Costs On Each Candidate

While dealing with a challenge against the cancellation of appointment of Assistant Teachers in the Basic Education Department based on the re-evaluation of answer booklets, the Allahabad High Court has held that less meritorious candidates cannot be allowed to continue on the posts at the cost of meritorious candidates.

The Court held that in the absence of a challenge to the process of re-evaluation, merely citing the lack of statutory provisions, cannot be a reason to disregard the process and accommodate less meritorious candidates who were selected based on fraudulent tabulation of marks.

“Fairness is the soul of any competitive examination. Any compromise of merit would betray confidence and trust of meritorious candidates on examination system and in case some irregularity is detected during process of examination and there is a scope to cure it, in the interest of justice and to maintain fairness, an endeavour has to be taken to cure it,” held Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery.

Factual Background

In 2018, the petitioners participated in the recruitment process of 68,500 Assistant Teachers in the Basic Education Department and were on the list of selected candidates. After verification of documents, they were appointed and later joined on probation for one year. The appointment of all 20 petitioners was later cancelled, and the same was challenged before the High Court.

Counsel for petitioners argued that the appointments were cancelled without providing any reason and the authority cancelling the appointment had no power to do so. It was argued that there was no provision or law permitting the authorities to re-evaluate the answer booklets of the petitioners. It was argued that the Government Orders relied on by the authorities to cancel the appointments did not provide for re-checking of answer booklets.

Ccounsel for respondents contended that during re-evaluation it was found that the petitioners had been allocated more marks than they had actually received. It was submitted that based on complaints, discrepancies in 343 answer booklets were discovered and re-evaluation was done.

During re-evaluation, a huge difference in marks and merit was found in 53 answer booklets, including the 20 petitioners who approached the High Court. Since the petitioners were wrongly selected, their appointment was cancelled.

High Court Verdict

On perusal of the answer booklets along with the tabulation chart, the Court observed that there was a difference in the marks received by the petitioners and the marks recorded in the tabulation chart. The Court observed that none of the petitioners had contested the lower marks awarded in the answer booklet on grounds of ambiguity.

Accordingly, the Court held that petitioners had been awarded more marks in the tabulation chart than their merit, and the fairness and merit of the selection process had been compromised.

The question which remained before the Court was whether, in the absence of any provision for re-evaluation of answer booklets, such exercise could be carried out when the petitioners were illegally benefited by recording higher marks in the tabulation chart.

Since it was not in dispute that the petitioners had been illegally benefited and there were no allegations regarding any discrepancies in the re-evaluation process, the Court held

“Less meritorious candidates are not allowed to continue in service at the cost of meritorious candidates and in order to maintain fairness, the procedure adopted by respondents could not be said to be illegal. There is no allegation of any impurity in process of rechecking.”

While dismissing the writ petitions, the Court imposed a cost of Rs. 5000/- on each petitioner to be paid to the High Court Legal Services Committee.

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 93

Case Title: Urvashi v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others [WRIT - A No. - 15229 of 2019]

Click Here To Read/Download Order