WWW.LIVELAW.IN CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M)
-1-
CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M) Suman vs State of Haryana and others
Present:
Mr. Manjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Sabherwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for respondent No. 5. Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vikas Suri, Advocate for respondent No. 6. Mr. Tajeshwar Singh, Advocate, for the applicant in CRM No. 29552/2017.
1.
Reply to the petition filed by respondent no. 6- High Court, in
Court, is taken on record. Copy furnished to counsel for the petitioner. 2.
The State of Haryana has not filed any reply despite
opportunity granted. 3.
In the case in hand, the petitioner, who claims herself to be a
candidate for HCS (Judicial Branch) Examination, filed the present petition raising an issue that the question paper for the preliminary examination conducted on 16.7.2017 was leaked. In support of her stand, she has placed on record a CD and text of certain conversation, which had taken place between the petitioner and one Sushila, another candidate, which according to the petitioner suggested that there was leakage of question paper. She also claimed that a complaint was made to the High Court on the Administrative side as well. 4.
Along with the reply filed by the High Court today, copy of the
report of the enquiry conducted by the Registrar (Vigilance) on the
1 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2017 14:50:10 :::
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M)
-2-
complaint dated 19.7.2017 filed by one Manoj, husband of the petitioner, has been annexed. Statements of certain persons concerned, including petitioner Suman and respondent no. 5- Sushila, were recorded. After considering the material produced before the Registrar (Vigilance), the following conclusions were drawn:i. That Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) handled and was having custody of the question papers from the time the question paper was set till the question papers were distributed for the examination; ii.
That Ms. Sunita and Ms. Sushila were having the copies of the question paper for HCS (JB) Preliminary Examination 2017 before the above said examination;
iii.
That Ms. Sunita was previously known to and having acquaintance with Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) and that Ms. Sushila was known to and having acquaintance with Ms. Sunita and Ms. Suman was known to and having acquaintance with Ms. Sushila before HCS (JB) Preliminary Examination 2017; and
iv.
That Ms. Sunita procured copy of question paper for HCS (JB) Preliminary Examination 2017 from Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) and thereafter she supplied copy thereof to Ms. Sushila and negotiated with Ms. Suman for supplying copy of the question paper to her for consideration.
5.
The Registrar (Vigilance), opined that the matter requires
further deeper probe.
2 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2017 14:50:13 :::
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M)
6.
-3-
The report was put up before Hon'ble the Recruitment/
Promotion/Court Creation Committee (Subordinate Judicial Service). The Committee in its meeting held on 29.8.2017 considering the report submitted
by
the
Registrar
(Vigilance),
made
the
following
recommendations:“(a)
In view of the prima facie finding that atleast two candidates namely Ms. Sunita and Sushila had the question papers and therefore the possibility that other candidates may have also had access to the question paper cannot be ruled out; in such circumstances, purity of the examination having been lost, the Committee recommends that the HCS (JB) Preliminary Examination 2017 held on 16.7.2017 be scrapped.
(b)
Keeping in view the finding that Dr. Balwinder Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) unequivocally stated that he had no prior acquaintance with Ms. Sunita (the topper in general category), while the call details given by the service provider reveal that there were a total of 760 calls and SMSs exchanged between Dr. Balwinder Sharma and Ms. Sunita during the last one year, indicate that the matter requires a deeper probe. Therefore, the Committee recommends that regular enquiry be initiated against Dr. Balwinder Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) on the basis of preliminary enquiry.
(c)
Dr. Balwinder Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) be transferred forthwith from this post pending further action.
(d)
An FIR be lodged against Ms. Sunita, Ms. Sushila and Dr. Balwinder Sharma, Registrar (Recruitment) to further probe the act of leakage of question paper of HCS (JB) Preliminary Examination 2017.”
7.
The matter was put up before Hon'ble the Chief Justice. While 3 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2017 14:50:13 :::
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M)
-4-
it was still under consideration, Sunita appeared. Her statement was directed to be recorded. It was partly recorded on 31.8.2017 when she appeared before the Registrar (Vigilance). However, the same could not be completed, as she claimed some health problem. She was directed to appear on 1.9.2017, but failed. Thereafter, when she was contacted, she informed that she was admitted in Civil Hospital, Mohali, hence, unable to come and get her statement recorded. Finally, the OSD (Vigilance) was deputed to get her statement recorded. The needful was done on 7.9.2017 by visiting Kalyani Hospital, Nazafgarh, New Delhi, where her statement was recorded by Mr. Rajesh Garg, OSD (Vigilance). Entire material along with the statement of Sunita was again put up before Hon'ble the Chief Justice, who vide noting dated 10.9.2017 agreed to the recommendations made by the Committee in para Nos. 'a', 'b' and 'c', as referred in para no.6, above. As regards recommendations made in para 'd', considering the fact that the matter was pending on judicial side, orders were awaited. 8.
Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Counsel appearing for the High
Court fairly submitted that keeping in view gravity of the issues involved, the High Court does not have any objection in case the matter is got investigated from an independent agency, however, the investigation should be by some senior officers, preferably by constituting a Special Investigating Team. He further submitted that the examination having been conducted at Chandigarh and even in the complaint filed by Manoj, it is claimed that some conversation or transaction had taken place in Sector-17 at Chandigarh, hence, it would be appropriate if FIR is registered at Chandigarh. He further suggested that it would be necessary to monitor the
4 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2017 14:50:13 :::
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M)
-5-
investigation as well, as the issue involved is required to be taken to logical end and truth is required to be unearthed. 9.
Keeping in view the aforesaid fair stand taken by the High
Court, in our view, FIR deserves to be registered at Chandigarh, initially in terms of the recommendations made in para 'd' of the report of the Committee, for further investigation by constituting a Special Investigating Team. Ordered accordingly. 10.
Let a copy of the order be supplied to Mr. Randeep Singh Rai,
Public Prosecutor, U.T. Chandigarh, who has put in appearance on our asking, for getting the needful done. He is requested to submit list of the senior officers, who can be the members of the Special Investigating Team, in a sealed cover on the next date of hearing. 11.
The Director General of Police, U.T. Chandigarh, is requested
to appear in person in Court on the next date of hearing. 12.
The Union Territory, Chandigarh, through its Home Secretary,
is directed to be impleaded as respondent no. 7 in the petition. The Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction. 13.
It is made clear that with reference to the alleged leakage of
question paper in question, investigation shall be made by the Chandigarh Police only. 14.
Keeping in view the seriousness of the matter and report of the
Registrar (Vigilance), prima facie, pointing out involvement of Dr. Balwinder
Kumar
Sharma,
Registrar
(Recruitment),
and
further
recommendations made by the Committee for deeper probe and disciplinary action against him, we recommend that the officer be placed under
5 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2017 14:50:13 :::
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CRM-M No. 28947 of 2017 (O&M)
-6-
suspension with immediate effect pending disciplinary proceedings, fixing his head quarter at any place other than Chandigarh. 15.
Adjourned to 18.9.2017.
16.
To be taken up at 2.00 PM.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
(Rajan Gupta) Judge
15.9.2017 vs
(G. S. Sandhawalia) Judge
6 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2017 14:50:13 :::
