Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 452 (CAL)

CHANDRA KANTA GANGULI v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2016-05-20

SANJIB BANERJEE

body2016
JUDGMENT : SANJIB BANERJEE, J. The petitioners are unemployed young residents of this State who complain of a sham process being undertaken for engagement of civic police volunteers in West Bengal Police in year 2013. The two matters pertain to the police stations of Barikul and Sarenga in district Bankura. 2. The charges in both petitions are similar. Pursuant to a notification of February 28, 2013, a recruitment drive was undertaken to enroll 1,30,000 civic police volunteers on temporary basis. The avowed purpose therefore was “to supplement the mainstream policing on special occasions such as festivals and emergent situations for traffic management, providing routine guarding duties for short duration deployment” and the like. The notification of February 28, 2013 contemplated ten days’ training to be imparted to the recruited volunteers and an honourarium of Rs.141.80p to each volunteer per day. The volunteers were to be provided two sets of uniforms and prior government approval would be required before actual deployment. The volunteers were to be recruited on the basis of the guidelines in a government order of September 26, 2011. 3. The guidelines for eligibility, mode of induction, training, duties and termination were indicated in the government order of September 26, 2011. The eligibility criteria were as follows: “I. Resident of the area under the police station where they will be deployed. II. Age between 20 to 30 years, (as on 1st January of the respective year of enrolment) III. Should have passed Madhyamik standard Examination. IV. Should have represented at least School/Club level sports. V. Should have experience as NCC Cadet/Boy Scouts/NSS Guide/Civil Defence Volunteers etc. VI. Should not have any criminal record against them in any police station. VII. Should be medically fit.” 4. The order of September 26, 2011 pertained to civic police volunteers in the commission rates of Howrah and Asansol-Durgapur, but the same guidelines other than clause A-4 were made applicable throughout the State by the order of February 28, 2013. A connected memorandum of March 1, 2013 was issued by the Special Inspector General of Police (HQ) West Bengal, inter alia, to all district Superintendents of Police and Commissioners of Police, excluding Kolkata. A connected memorandum of March 1, 2013 was issued by the Special Inspector General of Police (HQ) West Bengal, inter alia, to all district Superintendents of Police and Commissioners of Police, excluding Kolkata. The memorandum of March 1, 2013 advised the addressees to “take immediate steps to recruit the specified number of civic police volunteers as per the Government order and confirm West Bengal Police Directorate at the earliest …” The volunteers were to be recruited in different districts, commission rates and for GRP units in the manner indicated in a table that formed a part of the memorandum of March 1, 2013. South 24 Parganas, among the districts, was to have the maximum of 10,400 volunteers. Bankura was allotted 5,100 volunteers. 5. The petitioners claim that in terms of the relevant government orders, applications were invited for civic police volunteers all over the State including in Bankura. The applications were to be submitted to the local police stations. According to the petitioners, they were told that there would be a physical efficiency test and a physical measurement test followed by an interview and a final list of chosen volunteers would be published thereafter. The petitioners allege that no efficiency or measurement tests were conducted, but the petitioners received call letters to appear before an interview board. 6. The petitioners maintain that they were not subjected to any interview on the day that they were called therefore. The petitioners were not asked any questions but were required to submit photocopies of their identity cards and their call letters. According to the petitioners, later on the same day on which their interviews were scheduled, lists were published containing the names of the successful candidates and the petitioners’ names did not figure therein. 7. These petitions were received on April 18, 2016 when no order was passed since a selection process of 2013 was challenged in 2016. The primary contention of the petitioners was, however, noticed that nearly 1.3 lakh civic police volunteers had been engaged all over the State with the selection process being a perfunctory interview. Affidavits were called for and the order required the genesis of the decision to appoint civic volunteers, the legal sanction therefore, the method of recruitment, the evidence in support of how such method was followed and the particulars of the recruitment actually made to be furnished in the affidavits. 8. Affidavits were called for and the order required the genesis of the decision to appoint civic volunteers, the legal sanction therefore, the method of recruitment, the evidence in support of how such method was followed and the particulars of the recruitment actually made to be furnished in the affidavits. 8. When the matter was next taken up after receiving the State’s affidavit, a submission made on behalf of the petitioners was recorded and the State was given an opportunity to file a more detailed affidavit if it desired. By a further order of May 16, 2016, the original records pertaining to the interviews conducted for the engagement of civic volunteers at the two concerned police stations were directed to be produced. Further affidavits have been filed by the State and the original records pertaining to the interviews conducted at Barikul police station and Sarenga police station have been produced in court. 9. The initial affidavits on behalf of the State have been affirmed by the Principal Secretary (Coordination) in the Home Department. The subsequent affidavits have been affirmed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Administration), Bankura. 10. It is narrated in the State’s first affidavit that in 2011 the State decided to raise 1000 volunteers each for the Howrah and the Asansol-Durgapur police commission rates at an honourarium of Rs.141.80p per volunteer per day with a condition that such volunteers would be engaged for stretches not exceeding six months. The eligibility criteria, mode of induction and training conditions were indicated in the relevant memorandum of September 26, 2011. The affidavit says that on November 3, 2012 the Director and Inspector General of Police submitted a proposal to the government for engaging 1.3 lakh civic police volunteers for the entire State on short durations and when required by the Superintendents of Police in the districts and the Commissioners of Police in the commission rates. The affidavit indicates that on the basis of such proposal, the notification of February 28, 2013 was issued for engaging 1.3 lakh civic police volunteers all over the State and that pursuant to the same, the Superintendent of Police, Bankura issued instructions on March 7, 2013 to police stations in such district to invite applications for such purpose. The affidavit indicates that on the basis of such proposal, the notification of February 28, 2013 was issued for engaging 1.3 lakh civic police volunteers all over the State and that pursuant to the same, the Superintendent of Police, Bankura issued instructions on March 7, 2013 to police stations in such district to invite applications for such purpose. According to the affidavit, candidates were required to submit their applications by March 17, 2013 to the respective police stations and the officers-in-charge and inspectors-in-charge of the police stations were advised to submit the consolidated lists in excel sheets with the application forms to the reserve office in Bankura by March 23, 2013. The affidavit informs that the Additional Superintendent of Police, Bankura was appointed as the chairman of the selection committee on March 27, 2013 along with a Deputy Superintendent of Police, the RI Bankura, a sub-inspector of “DIB” Bankura, and another sub-inspector of “DAP” as the other members of the selection committee. 11. The affidavit claims that the Superintendent of Police, Bankura fixed the schedule for the interviews in respect of all 23 police stations of Bankura district “from 5th April, 2013 to 27th April, 2014, vide his Org No. 799(33)/RO dated 7.4.2013”. However, it appears from the copy document at annexure R -7 to such affidavit that the interviews were fixed between April 5, 2013 and April 4, 2013 and the date of the relevant order was April 2, 2013. Paragraphs 13 to 15 of the first affidavit filed by the State in WP 6371 (W) of 2016 record as follows: “13. After interview conducted by Selection Committee, 5100 candidates were provisionally selected in the District of Bankura for being members of Civic Volunteer Force out of which 160 CPVF from Sarenga Police Station and 120 CPVF from Barikul Police Station were provisionally selected. All such Civil Volunteers were selected provisionally after holding interview and on the basis of their application. A copy of said Memo dated 11.10.2013 is annexed hereto marked with letter R-8. “14. Every individual members of the Selection Committee awarded marks to the Candidates on the basis of the assessment by such individual members in the Interview Board and such marks were added. Selection was made on merit i.e. those getting more marks have been selected for enrolment as members of Civil Police Volunteer Force. “15. I further say 1,24,885 no. “14. Every individual members of the Selection Committee awarded marks to the Candidates on the basis of the assessment by such individual members in the Interview Board and such marks were added. Selection was made on merit i.e. those getting more marks have been selected for enrolment as members of Civil Police Volunteer Force. “15. I further say 1,24,885 no. of Civic Volunteers enrolled in the State of West Bengal as on 01.09.2014 in pursuance of G.O. No.752-PL dated 28.02.2013. A copy of the said Memo is annexed hereto marked with letter R-9.” 12. In the further affidavits affirmed by the Deputy Superintendent, some additional information have been furnished. At paragraph 5 of such affidavit it has been claimed that the police stations extensively announced the recruitment drive in the areas under their jurisdictions by sending representatives to villages, announcing the same on microphones, putting up banners at prominent places and by displaying the news on the notice boards of the police stations. Paragraph 8 from the second affidavits filed on behalf of the State in these two matters makes for interesting reading: “8. Total 946 eligible candidates of Barikul P.S. area were called to appear for interview of Civic Police Volunteer Force on 08.04.2013, out of which 875 candidates were appeared in interview and 71 candidates were absent. Every individual member of the Selection Committee awarded marks to the candidates on the basis of their assessment and such marks were added. The eligible candidates were selected provisionally on the basis of educational qualification, built, observation of application of mind, merit and aptitude.” “8. Total 1464 eligible candidates of Sarenga P.S. area were called to appear for interview on 12.04.2013, out of which 1351 candidates were appeared in interview and 113 candidates were absent. Every individual member of the Selection Committee awarded marks to the candidates on the basis of their assessment and such marks were added. The eligible candidates were selected provisionally on the basis of educational qualification, built, observation of application of mind, merit and aptitude.” 13. Two sets of hand-stitched sheets have been produced as the records of the interviews conducted at the Barikul and Sarenga police stations on April 8, 2013 and April 12, 2013, respectively. The format of the sheets are similar, but not identical. Apart from the usual details pertaining to the individual candidates, two of the columns need to be noticed. Two sets of hand-stitched sheets have been produced as the records of the interviews conducted at the Barikul and Sarenga police stations on April 8, 2013 and April 12, 2013, respectively. The format of the sheets are similar, but not identical. Apart from the usual details pertaining to the individual candidates, two of the columns need to be noticed. These two columns are, respectively, intituled as “Represented in any School/Club Sports. Yes or not” and “Experienced in NCC/Boys Scouts/NSS Guide/Civil Defence. Yes or not”. All the columns except the last six are entered in print. Five of the last six columns indicate the marks allotted to each candidate by the members of the interview board. The last column is the total of the marks obtained by each candidate. These last six columns are filled in hand. 14. As has been asserted in the affidavits filed by the State, 946 candidates were called for interviews on the same day on April 8, 2013 for Barikul police station and 1464 candidates were called for the interviews on the same day on April 12, 2013 for Sarenga police station. It is inconceivable that even if the interview board did not expect all the candidates who had applied would turn up for the interview, any reasonable person – far less a committee of police officers led by an Additional Superintendent of Police – could have contemplated that so many candidates could be interviewed on the same day. What is distressing is not that such a process as is evident from the records was conducted, but the State seeking to justify the process in its affidavits and in course of the submission on its behalf. There is no doubt that the interviews were not conducted and a charade of a process was gone through and falsely reflected in official records. It was not humanly or physically possible for the five supermen on the interview board to reasonably vet 1351 candidates in course of a single day for the Sarenga police station or even 875 candidates for the Barikul police station. It is unbelievable that the interviews were conducted at all and the less said about the matter, the better. 15. The tenor of the State’s affidavits is one of justification and reckless disregard for the rule of law. It is unbelievable that the interviews were conducted at all and the less said about the matter, the better. 15. The tenor of the State’s affidavits is one of justification and reckless disregard for the rule of law. The affidavits reveal that there may not be any system in place at all nor any institutional integrity. 16. In course of the State’s submission it is submitted that only candidates who obtained 60 marks or more at the interview were selected. However, the eligibly criteria, as vague as they are, were not met by most of the selected candidates on the counts of experience in NCC or the like or representation at school or club-level sports. 17. More fundamentally, the entire designing of the process was faulty, probably deliberately so. Citizens in this country have a right to be fairly considered for any State engagement, even on a temporary basis. As a corollary, the State is obliged, under the constitutional norms, to devise a rational mechanism for handing out engagements, even on a temporary basis. There must be some reasonable eligibility criteria set and a rational scheme devised to ensure the fair consideration of the candidatures. The recruitment drive cannot be seen to be rational or reasonable when the selection of the candidates was left to the ipse dixit of the interview boards without any guidelines for any objective assessment. Law journals in this country abound with judicial pronouncements of the constitutional courts frowning upon any selection process which is not overwhelmingly based on objective considerations. 18. There is no evidence whether the engagements have been given on political or other extraneous considerations, but it is good enough to set aside a process which was designed to subvert due process. 19. Any person doing business with any government or seeking to obtain any funds from the government would know of the myriad formalities that need to be complied with to get even a rupee. Here was a recruitment process that had the potential of costing the State revenue in excess of Rs.400 crore a year, with no checks in place to ensure that deserving candidates were selected. The entire scheme appears to have been framed for the choice of candidates to be made on extraneous and constitutionally immoral considerations. 20. Here was a recruitment process that had the potential of costing the State revenue in excess of Rs.400 crore a year, with no checks in place to ensure that deserving candidates were selected. The entire scheme appears to have been framed for the choice of candidates to be made on extraneous and constitutionally immoral considerations. 20. Nothing in the affidavits filed by the State speak of any agency vested with the authority of exercising any supervision over the selection process or the adherence to the eligibility criteria or the like. That the interview board decided to call 946 candidates in Barikul and 1464 candidates in Sarenga on a single day reeks of such board’s intention of not going through a reasonable procedure for selection. The affidavits refer to “eligible candidates” being called for the interviews, but apart from the fact the interviews were not conducted, as they could not have been in a single day, it is difficult to imagine that the educational qualifications of 1351 candidates could be assessed in course of a single working day since the records produced reveal that the interview sheets were signed by the members of the interview board on the same day that they had claimed to have conducted the interview. 21. It is not necessary to conjecture whether a mock process was gone through to confer benefits on a pre-selected few or whether the members of the interview board had the charter to make merry and earn themselves a bonanza. What is evident is that a scheme was devised to prey on the unemployed with little respect for the taxpayers’ money. 22. There is no doubt that these petitioners ought to have come much earlier than in 2016 to complain of acts of the year 2013. But the quality of the complaint and the facts that have come to light in pursuance thereof are such that the colossal act of illegality cannot be wished away on the ground of the delayed complaint. 23. It is completely unacceptable that there were no checks and balances put in place to ensure that a transparent process was followed, particularly when it costs the State exchequer an amount of about Rs.1.80 crore a day if all the civic volunteers envisaged to be recruited are engaged. 24. 23. It is completely unacceptable that there were no checks and balances put in place to ensure that a transparent process was followed, particularly when it costs the State exchequer an amount of about Rs.1.80 crore a day if all the civic volunteers envisaged to be recruited are engaged. 24. Since the recruitment drive undertaken at the police stations of Barikul and Sarenga in Bankura district reveal a sham process that cannot be sustained on any legal or constitutionally acceptable grounds, the entire process of the 2013 recruitment of civic police volunteers at these two police stations is set aside. Since there is no evidence of the complicity of those who were engaged in the matter of their selection, the dues of all persons who have been engaged will be met; but no further engagement will be offered to any of such persons with effect from today. It will be open to the appropriate authorities to undertake the recruitment drive afresh upon sufficient checks and balances being put in place to ensure the sanctity of the process as directed hereinafter. 25. The facts that have come to light may only be the tip of the iceberg. In this jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, the wide authority of a constitutional court permits orders to be passed beyond the immediate issue that has been carried by a citizen if a systemic malaise is detected. Since the process of recruitment of civic police volunteers, even on a temporary basis, appears to have been altogether faulty in the assessment for selection being left to the vagaries of subjectivity, without any objective criteria, and the basic eligibility criteria may not have been met in most cases, the recruitment drive undertaken throughout the State for engaging civic police volunteers in 2013 has to be reviewed. A committee is constituted comprising the Principal Secretary in the Finance Department as the chairman and the present Transport Secretary and the present Commissioner of the Bidhannagar Police commissioner ate as members, to look into the process of the 2013 recruitment of civic police volunteers all over the State and annul such of the engagements that may have been brought about in derogation of the eligibility criteria and without actually the candidates being interviewed in a reasonable process in the light of this judgment. The committee will present its report to the Chief Secretary to the State government within three months from date, making recommendations to ensure the safeguards that should be maintained in any future recruitment process by providing for at least 80 per cent of the consideration to be based on objective assessment and no more than 20 per cent of the consideration to be based on any subjective assessment as an interview. 26. The engagements of civic police volunteers under the 2013 recruitment process shall not be valid after the end of this calendar year since such process did not provide for any objective assessment of the candidates. It will be open to the State to undertake a fresh recruitment process for engaging civic police volunteers in accordance with law after the safeguards recommended by the committee are put in place. 27. These petitioners will be considered for the next recruitment drive at their local police stations even if these petitioners are over aged as per any age qualification that may be imposed. 28. The records of the alleged interview process produced by the State are too good to be returned to the State. The State will only obtain copies thereof, but subject to any judicial order requiring the production of such records, the same should be retained in this court to be ultimately displayed in its archives, if only to show how a selection process should never be. 29. WP 6371 (W) of 2016 and WP 6372 (W) of 2016 are allowed as above but without any order as to costs. 30. Urgent certified website copies of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.