TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 2044
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... safe custody of the Board were intact and tampering took place only with regard to 196 scanned images of the OMR Sheets. 2. The learned single Judge at the Madurai Bench of this court allowed the writ petitions filed by the aggrieved candidates and set aside the notification cancelling the examination with a clear finding that it is possible to segregate the tainted candidates from the non-tainted ones. However, similar writ petitions were dismissed by another learned single Judge of the Principal Bench subsequently, even after taking cognizance of the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench at Madurai on the very same issue. The appeals:- 3. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the learned single Judge at the Madurai Bench setting aside the notification cancelling the selection process, the Board has come up with the intra court appeals in W.A. (MD) Nos. 751 to 753 of 2018. 4. The subsequent order passed by the learned single Judge of the Principal Bench dismissing the writ petitions even after taking note of the decision of the co-ordinate Bench is under challenge at the instance of the unsuccessful writ petitioners in W.A. Nos. 2002 of 2018 etc. batch. Brief facts:-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have placed reliance on the order passed by the learned single Judge of the Madurai Bench setting aside the notification issued by the Board cancelling the selection process. The learned single Judge took note of the decision rendered by the co-ordinate Bench. However, without following the said order or taking any action for reference to a Division Bench, on account of the disagreement to the views expressed by the Madurai Bench, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petitions on the ground that the sanctity of the selection process should be maintained by all concerned. Rival submissions:- 9. The learned Senior Counsel for the appellants in W.A. No. 1665 of 2018 and the other counsels for the writ petitioners who are the appellants in the appeals filed against the order passed by the learned single Judge at the Principal Bench and the respondents in the appeals preferred by the Board challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge at the Madurai Bench, contended that even as per the records produced by the Board, it is very clear that the OMR Sheets are even now in the safe custody of the Board. According to the learned counsel for the respective parties, only t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scanned images of the OMR Sheets. The outsourcing agency submitted the report of evaluation to the Board. The Board thereafter invited 2109 candidates for certificate verification. The material dates relating to examination:- 13. The tentative keys were released on 6 October 2017. The final key, merit list, C.V. List at the ratio of 1:2 was released on 7 November 2017. The Board issued call letters to 1390 Engineering subject candidates and 719 non engineering candidates for certificate verification. The published results were withdrawn on 11 December 2017. 14. While so, the Board received complaints regarding malpractices that took place during the process of evaluation. The Board therefore issued a notification in its website on 11 December 2017 discontinuing the certificate verification process and requested the candidates to submit their written representations on or before 18 December 2017. The Board in the mean time lodged a complaint to the Commissioner of Police resulting in registering a case in Crime No. 468 of 2017 on 21 December 2017. It was only thereafter, and more particularly on 8 February 2018, the Board took a decision to cancel the entire competitive examinati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er others were also involved, the Investigating Officer of the Crime Branch was summoned to appear before this Court along with the entire records. 19. The Investigating Officer appeared before us on 20 February 2019 and submitted that the investigation revealed that more marks were awarded to 196 candidates by using the scanned images of OMR sheets and that the originals of the entire OMR sheets are in the safe custody of the Board. 20. Subsequently, the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, CCB, Chennai, who is the Investigating Officer submitted a Memo, wherein, it was stated that after the examination, all the answer sheets were collected and it was kept in the safe custody of the Board at its DPI Campus, Chennai. The Additional Deputy Commissioner further stated that there was tampering in respect of 196 scanned images of OMR sheets of candidates and it was verified by comparing the original OMR sheets retained with the Board and the scanned copies seized from the outsourcing agency. 21. The Chairman of the Board, Chennai, by communication dated 26 February 2019, informed the Additional Commissioner of Police, CCB that the entire OMR Sheets except the 196 sheets seized ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ass cheating and unproven imputed charge of corruption and only in case, tainted cases are found to be impossible or highly improbable, en masse order of termination could be issued. The Supreme Court in the said case found that it was possible to separate the tainted from non-tainted ones and as such, opined that the Government was not correct in cancelling the entire selection. 24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu and another (2003) 7 SCC 285] made it clear that in case it is possible to weed out the beneficiaries of irregularities, or illegalities, from the select list, there would not be any justification to deny appointment to the selected candidates whose selection was not vitiated in any manner. The relevant observation reads thus:- "In the light of the above and in the absence of any specific or categorical finding supported by any concrete and relevant material that widespread infirmities of an all-pervasive nature, which could be really said to have undermined the very process itself in its entirety or as a whole and it was impossible to weed out the beneficiaries of one or the other irregularities, or illegalit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtain reports appeared with regard to the alteration of marks in the scanned images of the OMR Sheets. The Board on apprehension that its name would also be tarnished, immediately cancelled the entire selection process without considering the case of the candidates, who were not party to any such malpractices. When it is possible to separate the tainted candidates from the non-tainted, the Board was not correct in cancelling the examination and the entire selection. 27. The learned single Judge at the Principal Bench while dismissing the writ petitions virtually overruled the views taken by a coordinate Bench. It is not as if the earlier decision was not brought to the notice of the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge took note of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench at Madurai. However, without following the said judgment, or making a reference to the Division Bench, the learned Single Judge straight away dismissed the writ petitions. It is not as if that it would be difficult to follow the views taken by the learned single Judge at Madurai Bench on account of the contrary views taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court also held that if it is poss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmission v. Harish Kumar Purohit (2003) 5 SCC 480: 2003 SCC (L&S) 703] this Court held that a Bench must follow the decision of a coordinate Bench and take the same view as has been taken earlier. The earlier decision of the coordinate Bench is binding upon any latter coordinate Bench deciding the same or similar issues. If the latter Bench wants to take a different view than that taken by the earlier Bench, the proper course is for it to refer the matter to a larger Bench. 19. In the instant case, the position before us is worse as the latter Bench has taken a divergent view from an earlier coordinate Bench, particularly taking note of the earlier decision holding otherwise, without explaining why it could not follow the said precedent even while extensively quoting the same. Judicial propriety and discipline are not served by such conduct on the part of the Division Bench. Thus, in view of the above, it was not permissible for the High Court to take the course which it has adopted and such a course cannot be approved." 30. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sant Lal Gupta relating to binding nature of the decisions rendered by the Coordinate Bench would appl....