JUDGMENT R.G. Avachat, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The challenge in all these writ petitions is to the order dated 28.2.2018, passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nasik (respondent No.3), canceling the selection/ recruitment process undertaken for filling up the clerical vacancies on the establishment of Ahmednagar District Central Co-operative Bank, petitioner in Writ Petition No.8811/2018 (for short, petitioner Bank). 3. All these writ petitions were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, the pleadings and the parties in Writ Petition No.8811/2018 are referred to. Facts :- 4. Petitioner Bank is a Co-operative Society, registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, the Act of 1960) and has been doing Banking business within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The petitioner Bank proposed to fill up the vacancies in the cadre of Clerks, Junior Officers and Officers in the Managerial level on its establishment. The petitioner Bank, therefore, engaged National Institute for Banking Education and Research (NIBER) as an agency to complete the recruitment process. The NIBER did its job. Final select lists were prepared and submitted to respondent No.3 for approval. Complaints of nepotism, favouritism etc. in the recruitment process were made to the State and the authority of Department of Cooperation. The Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, therefore, appointed a four member committee, headed by an officer of the rank of District Deputy Registrar (DDR) to enquire into the complaints. The Committee made enquiry and submitted its report dated 17.1.2018, observing illegalities and irregularities in the recruitment process. The Joint Registrar (respondent No.3) accepted the report and cancelled the select lists for the posts of Junior Officer and Clerk. This is how the petitioner Bank is, before this Court, challenging the cancellation of the select lists. The petitioners in other Writ Petitions are some of the candidates selected for the posts of Junior Officer and/or Clerk. They too have sought for the same relief. 5. Heard Shri R.N. Dhorde, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Bank. Also heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in other Writ Petitions. The learned A.G.P. made his submissions on behalf of the respondent No.1/ State and its instrumentalities i.e. respondent No.2 Commissioner of Co-operation and respondent No.3 Divisional Joint Registrar. Also heard Mr. 5. Heard Shri R.N. Dhorde, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Bank. Also heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in other Writ Petitions. The learned A.G.P. made his submissions on behalf of the respondent No.1/ State and its instrumentalities i.e. respondent No.2 Commissioner of Co-operation and respondent No.3 Divisional Joint Registrar. Also heard Mr. P.M. Shah, learned Senior Counsel for NIBER. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Bank would submit that, an independent and reputed agency (NIBER) had been engaged to undertake the recruitment process. The petitioner Bank played no role in recruitment process. No complaint had been received until the final select lists were prepared. Some of the candidates who could not make it to the select lists might have made those complaints. Since the complaints were backed by a nationally known social worker, the same appear to have been blown out of proportion. Before taking a decision of scrapping of select lists, the petitioner Bank ought to have been given an opportunity of hearing. The learned counsel would submit that the conclusions drawn by the enquiry committee were based on surmises and conjectures. He took us through chronology of events of the recruitment process. According to learned counsel, since number of candidates had appeared for the examination, it was but natural that a few of them are relations of the members of the Board of Directors. Some are bound to be from Talukas from which the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the petitioner Bank hailed. The candidates in the select lists are meritorious. According to learned counsel, the report of the enquiry committee is based on surmises and conjectures. He, therefore, urged for setting aside the enquiry report and consequential decision of cancellation of the select lists. 7. Learned Counsel representing the petitioners in other Writ Petitions adopted the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner Bank. 8. Shri P.M. Shah, the learned Senior Counsel for the NIBER would submit that, the recruitment process had been conducted in strict adherence to the directions issued by the SLTF. According to learned Senior Counsel, NIBER is an independent and reputed agency. There were no complaints until the select lists were prepared. The findings recorded by the enquiry committee were based on surmises and conjectures. 9. The learned A.G.P. would, on the other hand, submit that the enquiry committee did onerous task. According to learned Senior Counsel, NIBER is an independent and reputed agency. There were no complaints until the select lists were prepared. The findings recorded by the enquiry committee were based on surmises and conjectures. 9. The learned A.G.P. would, on the other hand, submit that the enquiry committee did onerous task. The petitioner Bank and the NIBER had been given opportunity to put forth their side. The answer sheets were examined. According to learned A.G.P., the findings recorded by the enquiry committee have factual base. The learned A.G.P. also produced on record answer sheets examined by the enquiry committee. According to learned A.G.P., no interference with the decision as to cancellation of the select lists is warranted. Enquiry Report : 10. The enquiry committee extensively scrutinised the record and submitted its voluminous report. The findings recorded by the enquiry committee are as follows :- (1) Relatives of the Chairman of the petitioner Bank, son of the Vice Chairman, a grandson of one of the Directors of the Bank and the son of the Chief Executive Officer of the Bank are in the select list for the post of Junior Officer. These selectees have secured almost identical marks in the written examination. They have been awarded out of out marks for oral test. This is all objectionable. (2) The Chairman of the petitioner Bank hails from Taluka Akole, District Ahmednagar. 25 of the selected candidates for the post of Junior Officer are from this Taluka. While 12 of them find place in first 50 selected candidates. While 28 selectees for the post of Clerk are from Akole Taluka, and 13 of them are in first 50. (3) The Vice Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer of the petitioner Bank are from Sangamner taluka. Many of the candidates selected for the cadre of Junior Officer are from Sangamner taluka. (4) The candidate who stood first in the select list for the post of Clerk, has secured only 24 out of 90 marks in the written examination for the post of Junior Officer. The written examinations for both the posts were held on one and the same day. The syllabus for both the examinations was more or less common. (4) The candidate who stood first in the select list for the post of Clerk, has secured only 24 out of 90 marks in the written examination for the post of Junior Officer. The written examinations for both the posts were held on one and the same day. The syllabus for both the examinations was more or less common. The fact that this candidate secured very less marks in the examination for the post of Junior Officer gives a reason to raise a serious doubt as to his capacity/ ability to pass the written test for the post of Clerk. (5) In the original answer sheets of some of the candidates, the circles were made dark with different ink. On the back side of answer sheets, there is difference in respect of mark appearing due to darkening of the circle. The Committee suspected that some of the circles have been darkened after examination was over. (6) In some cases, the answers are serially found to be correct. Most of the selectees are from Akole and Sangamner Taluka, from which the Chairman and (7) Some of the selected candidates have secured less marks in their 10th and 12th Standard examinations. These candidates, have, however, scored high marks in written test. The same indicates malpractice in the selection process. (8) The relatives of the Bank, Chairman, Vice Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and one of the Directors have been selected. (9) After the interviews were held, the lists of the marks obtained in the interviews were submitted to the agency NIBER after 15 days. It ought to have been submitted within 3 days. The delay might have been used for manipulation of marks of interview. The answer sheets have not been scanned in the presence of the candidates appeared for the examination. The scanning should have been video recorded. The same should have been under the surveillance of CCTV cameras. (10) The interview committee consisted of 7 members. All the members gave out of out marks to many of the candidates. If the time table of the oral test is considered, the interview lasted for 8 hours per day. The same indicates that, none of the candidate was interviewed for more than 2 minutes. It is humanly impossible to assess the ability of a candidate by an interview panel of not less than 7 members within two minutes. If the time table of the oral test is considered, the interview lasted for 8 hours per day. The same indicates that, none of the candidate was interviewed for more than 2 minutes. It is humanly impossible to assess the ability of a candidate by an interview panel of not less than 7 members within two minutes. (11) The enquiry committee has, however, found that, the entire select lists have not been affected by favouritism and nepotism. The committee meant to say that there are very many candidates who have been selected on merit. Conclusions : 11. We have carefully considered the contentions of either side in the light of the material produced on record, including the enquiry report. The NABARD had constituted State Level Task Force (SLTF) to deliberate and set the norms concerning the processes for recruitment of personnel in the Cooperative Banks. The SLTF has, in turn, given some norms and instructions to be followed during the process of recruitment of Banking personnel. The record indicates that the petitioner Bank had observed those norms and selected the NIBER as an agency to undertake the recruitment process. The NIBER has an experience of undertaking recruitment process of personnel on the establishment of Urban Banks. The NIBER was one of the 4 agencies, which had responded to the petitioner Bank''s invitation for offer. However, no representative of the other 3 agencies had personally appeared. The respondent No.4, therefore, came to be selected. 12. The agreement came to be inked between the petitioner Bank and the NIBER. The recruitment was for filling up of 505 posts. The petitioner Bank published an advertisement in Marathi, in a regional newspaper having wide circulation. Applications were received Online. It was an examination carrying 100 marks. Written Test was of 90 marks. 10 Marks were for viva voce and educational qualification (5 marks each). The written test was of multiple choice objective questions. No benchmark was reserved for a candidate to get through the written examination. The final select list was to be drawn on the basis of total marks secured in the written test, viva voce and scrutiny of documents. Each of the members of the interview panel was to give marks out of 5. Marks given by all of them were to be aggregated. The final select list was to be drawn on the basis of total marks secured in the written test, viva voce and scrutiny of documents. Each of the members of the interview panel was to give marks out of 5. Marks given by all of them were to be aggregated. The reason to state so here is that, a candidate who fared very well in the written examination was likely to be selected even though he secures very less marks in viva voce. 13. The record indicates that, the NIBER got printed the question papers from a private agency since the Government Printing Press at Yerwada informed NIBER that it only undertakes Government jobs. As scheduled, written tests were held on 13.8.2017 for the post of Junior Officer and Clerk. It was one question paper in four sets, A, B, C & D. It was so done with a view to avoid copying. Each candidate appearing for the written examination was provided with carbonless question paper-cum-answer sheet (OMR Sheet) in duplicate. Candidates were allowed to carry second copy. After the written examination, answer key was published. This facilitated each of the candidates to know, before the result of the examination is out, how did he fare in the written examination. 14. Scanning of the answer sheets was done on the day the written examination was over. It was done in the presence of representative of the petitioner Bank. True, the scanning has not been done under the surveillance of CCTV Camera. The fact, however, is that, the pen drive containing the scanning of the answer sheets was given, one to the petitioner Bank and one was retained by the NIBER. It appears that, the enquiry committee has not looked into the soft copy of the scanned answer sheets. 15. Scrutiny of documents was made after the results of the written examinations were declared. A few of the candidates successful in the written examination had not been issued call letters for interview, since they failed in the scrutiny of their documents/ testimonials. Panel Of Interview : 16. The panel of interview was comprised of the following seven members. 1) Chairman of the Bank, President. 2) District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ahmednagar, Member. 3) Social Welfare Officer, Member. 4) Tribal Social Welfare Officer, Member. 5) Women and Child Welfare Officer, Member. 6) Employment Exchange Officer, Member. Panel Of Interview : 16. The panel of interview was comprised of the following seven members. 1) Chairman of the Bank, President. 2) District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ahmednagar, Member. 3) Social Welfare Officer, Member. 4) Tribal Social Welfare Officer, Member. 5) Women and Child Welfare Officer, Member. 6) Employment Exchange Officer, Member. 7) Chief Executive Officer of the Bank, Member Secretary. The interview panel was constituted in observance with the directions of SLTF. The interviews were held from 18.9.2017 to 23.9.2017. 17. Admittedly, no complaint regarding the select lists for the posts in Managerial Cadre was received. Moreover, no complaint was received during the recruitment process. It was only after the select lists were prepared and published, some complaints were received. It is reiterated that, a Gandhian social worker had backed the complaints. He hails from Ahmednagar. As stated above, a four member committee headed by officer of the rank of DDR was constituted. The Committee made enquiry threadbare. The petitioner Bank and the NIBER had been given opportunity to offer their explanation to the complaints. Both have availed the opportunity. The respondent No.3, after perusal of the enquiry report, took the impugned decision of cancelling the select list. The petitioner Bank, therefore, could not be heard to have not been given opportunity of hearing before impugned decision was taken. 18. As stated above, there were a few complaints only. Page Nos.341 to 355 of the Paper Book of Writ Petition No.8811/2018, contain 70 complaints. After going through the alleged complaints, it is evident that, there are only 5 or 6 complaints and the rest were compliments stating that the recruitment process had been completed in transparent manner and the selected candidates be issued appointment orders. The first complaint indicates that the complainant had a grievance as regards selection of candidates who hail from the towns, the Chairman, Vice Chairman of the petitioner Bank hailed. The complainants had also grievance as regards some of the selectees being relatives of persons controlling the petitioner Bank. Rest of the complaints were general in nature and were particularly relating to procedure of the recruitment process, applying reservation, grant of less marks in viva voce etc. 19. The enquiry committee identified some of the selected candidates, regarding whose selection there was infirmity and illegality. It is reiterated that, the enquiry committee has found selection of other candidates to have not been tainted with. 19. The enquiry committee identified some of the selected candidates, regarding whose selection there was infirmity and illegality. It is reiterated that, the enquiry committee has found selection of other candidates to have not been tainted with. So far as regards the post of Junior Officer is concerned, the enquiry committee has identified 36 candidates, whose selection is found by the committee to be afflicted by illegality, nepotism, favouritism etc. These 36 candidates include relatives of Chairman, Vice Chairman and Managing Director of the petitioner Bank. Some of the candidates hail from Sangamner or Akole Taluka. The remarks given by the enquiry committee against each of those candidates have been perused by us. (Page Nos.391 to 421 of Paper Book of Writ Petition No.8811/2018). Principle is, justice should not only be done but it shall also appear to have been done. We concur with the remarks of the enquiry committee. So far as regards candidate No.1 (Role No.23011) is concerned, the Committee found the darkening of circles had been made through different pen. It also found that, some of the circles might have been darkened by someone other than the candidate. (pages 391 to 421). 20. Similarly, as regards post of Clerk is concerned, the Committee has identified 28 selected candidates. The remarks given by the selection committee against each of these candidates indicate the committee to have found illegalities, irregularities, favouritism as is found against nearly 36 candidates selected for the post of Junior Officer. We are, however, not in agreement with the findings of the Committee that some of the selected candidates, who have secured barely passing marks in their 10th and 12th Standard examinations, how could fare well in the written examinations. Admittedly, minimum educational qualification for the post advertised was graduate. The enquiry committee appears to have ignored the fact that the wisdom comes with age. A person, by exerting more may earn success. Suffice it to say that there is no logic behind the conclusion that a person who was not good in academics in 10th or 12th Standard, would remain so at his graduate level and even thereafter. The Committee also found that many of the selected candidates have been awarded out of out marks in the interview i.e. 5 out of 5. The Committee also found that many of the selected candidates have been awarded out of out marks in the interview i.e. 5 out of 5. We have examined some of the mark sheets of the oral tests/ interview to find that most of the candidates who have been awarded out of out marks are highly educated. Many of them are Engineering Graduates (B.E.) with Masters in Management (M.B.A.). Some of them are found to have been postgraduate in Science etc. It is true that, one of the selected candidate is the son of Chief Executive Officer, who was the member of interview committee. The Chief Executive Officer is stated to have refrained from conducting his son''s interview. We, however, do not find his relationship with the candidate to have remained uninfluenced. This candidate has secured out of out marks. The Committee has also examined some of the candidates who have been selected or successful in the written examination. Their answer sheets have also been scrutinised. We have also examined their answer sheets. We are in agreement with the enquiry committee''s findings in identifying the candidates whose selection the Committee found to have been tainted with. The Committee''s observations, however, appear to be not conclusive in nature, for it has suggested to have all the answer sheets of all the candidates successful in written examination, scrutinised by/ from competent Government agency and with advanced technology, and then finalise the select lists. We are in agreement with the suggestions made by the enquiry committee, but only to the extent of the candidates whose selection has been found to have been doubtful. The committee has found that many of the candidates have been selected on their own merit. The committee has given some of the names in the representative capacity to suggest the selection of those candidates has been merit based. All the conclusions arrived at by the committee are not conclusive in nature. The conclusion has been drawn on preponderance of probabilities. We are, therefore, not inclined to agree with the report of the enquiry committee in its entirety. The Divisional Joint Registrar (respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.8811/2018) ought not to have cancelled the select lists in entirety. According to us, the candidates who have been selected on their own merit should not suffer for no fault of theirs. We are, therefore, not inclined to agree with the report of the enquiry committee in its entirety. The Divisional Joint Registrar (respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.8811/2018) ought not to have cancelled the select lists in entirety. According to us, the candidates who have been selected on their own merit should not suffer for no fault of theirs. It may happen that for future selection process the candidate become age barred. It is true that a selected candidate has no vested right to be appointed to a post for which he has been selected. According to us, there is no specific or categorical finding supported by a concrete or relevant material to suggest for scrapping of the select lists in entirety. According to us, the respondent No.3 Divisional Joint Director in Writ Petition No.8811/2018 took an unreasonable decision of cancelling the entire selection process when so was not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 21. It is reiterated that, the fact that some of the selected candidates are relatives and/or from the villages/ Talukas of the persons managing the petitioner Bank, has weighed with the enquiry committee to come to its conclusion. There was no direct evidence to suspect a foul play in the recruitment process. It would, therefore, be desirable that the record of the 36 and 28 candidates for the posts of Clerks and Junior Officers, identified by the enquiry committee, is again scrutinised and final decision is taken by Joint Registrar (respondent No.3). 22. For the reasons aforesaid, the Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the following order :- ORDER (i) Writ Petition No.8811/2018 is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned decision dated 28.2.2018, cancelling the select lists is hereby partly set aside. (iii) The cancellation of select lists to the extent of 36 candidates selected for the post of Junior Officers, mentioned at Page No.289 of the enquiry report - Part I -whose names find place in the select list appearing at Pages 363 to 375 of the enquiry report (Paper Book Pages 391 to 421 of Writ Petition No.8811/2018); and 28 candidates selected for the post of Clerk (Page 443 of the enquriy report Volume II (Pages 431 to 456 of Paper Book of Writ Petition No.8811/2018) is upheld. The respondent No.3 shall, however, again scrutinise the entire record of these candidates and take a final decision about their selection within a period of six months from today. (iv) The decision of cancellation of the selection of other candidates named in the select lists is, thus, set aside. (v) In view of the above order, Writ Petitions No.2666/2018, 2671/2018, 2689/2018, 2690/2018, 2691/2018 and 2695/2018 and the pending Civil Applications therein are disposed of. Rule made partly absolute in above terms.