Tejavathu Chandu v. Food Corporation of India

1. This case is listed today as 15.11.2013 was declared a holiday.

2. By this writ petition, petitioner who is put at serial no. 1 in the waiting list for the post of Assistant General Manager (Accounts) seeks direction for cancellation of the appointment of respondent no.2 who was placed at serial no.2 in the select list. Both the petitioner and respondent no.2 are aspirants to the two posts of AGM (Accounts) in the ST Category. If the respondent no.2‟s name is cancelled as appearing at serial no.2 in the select list, then 2013:DHC:5993 petitioner who is at serial no.1 in the wait list would accordingly get the appointment.

3. The only issue urged before me and as pleaded in the writ petition for cancellation of the appointment of respondent no.2 is that respondent no.2 did not give the original documents for verification at the time of interview and which is so required as per the „General Information and Instructions‟ given in the advertisement. It is argued that as per petitioner‟s personal knowledge, respondent no.2 had not given the original documents at the time of interview. Also, though there is no such averment in the writ petition, it is now argued before me that respondent no. 2 was given two hours time to produce the original documents.

4. Respondent no.1 has filed a counter-affidavit and has totally denied the case of the petitioner. It is stated that Recruiting Agency M/s All India Management Association (AIMA) has specifically informed the respondent no.1 of document verification of the successful candidates in terms of the letter dated 14.6.2011. This is stated in para 5.11 of the counter-affidavit of respondent no.1 and which reads as under:- “5.11 That the contents of para 5.11 of the Writ Petiton, as stated, are wrong and denied. Each and every averment made in the para under reply is palpably wrong and hence specifically denied. It is respectfully submitted that submission of the petitioner is baseless and devoid of any merits as the Recruiting Agency vide its letter dated 14.06.2011 had submitted the final result/merit list for the post of AGM (Accounts) along with document verification repot to the answering respondent. The name of Shri Ravi Kumar, Roll No. 911050061 (respondent no.2 herein) appears at Sl. No. 18 in the document verification report submitted by Recruiting Agency, the requirement to produce the original documents has been “COMPLIED” by the respondent no.2. Reference may be given to what all stated herein above.”

5. The letter of AIMA dated 14.6.2011 is annexed with the counteraffidavit and the same reads as under:- AIMA/FCI-HQ/CAT-1/2010 14th June 2011 THE DY.

GENERAL MANAGER (RPI)

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA HEAD QUARTERS, 16-20, BARAKHAMBA LANE, NEW DELHI-11 0 001 Kind Attn: Mr. Debasis Mishra FINAL RESULT OF RECRUITMENT TEST FOR THE PSOT OF “AGM(ACCOUNTS)” Sir, Reference is made to your letter No.1-5/2010/RPI and your notification published in the Employment News dated 08 January 2011. We have completed compilation of results of the candidates who attended Personal Interview, assigning weightages for Written Test and Personal Interview in the ratio 87.5:12.[5] as per the guidelines. Total 520 candidates had been registered for the written test held on 3rd April 2011 of which 343 appeared for the test. Following reports of the 76 candidates shortlisted for Interviews are submitted herewith:

2 Category wise Merit List of Eligible Candidates 3 Application forms and attached documents of eligible candidates 4 CD containing database of the candidates The reports, together with copies of the candidates‟ documents may please be perused in default at your end. In case of any clarification please feel free to contract us. The smooth and fair administration of the test was made possible purely because of the guidance, clarifications and cooperation wholeheartedly extended by you and your team. We remain thankful to you in this regard. With warm regards, Yours sincerely, Raghu (Deputy Director-CMS)

6. I may note that petitioner in spite of opportunities has not filed any rejoinder-affidavit and a statement was made on 16.1.2013 that no rejoinder affidavit is required to be filed. Contents of the counter-affidavit therefore being unrebutted will have to be accepted.

7. In any case, I have failed to understand as to how a self serving averment of the petitioner made without any basis can be believed that respondent no.2 has failed to give the original documents at the time of interview for verification. In my opinion, there is no reason to disbelieve the letter of AIMA dated 14.6.2011 that there has been original document verification of the successful candidates. If I allow assertions as are made in this writ petition to prevail it would mean that on a totally assumptive basis if an allegation is made, court must believe and act upon the same and grant the relief. This however cannot be so in law.

8. In view of the above, there is no merit in the petition as respondent no.2 cannot be said to have not shown the original documents for verification as is being alleged on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed, with costs of Rs.20,000/-. Costs can be recovered by respondent no.1 in accordance with law.

NOVEMBER 21, 2013 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. ib