CWP-26555 IN TH 229 Gurvinder Si State of Punja CORAM: Present : HARPREET 1. Constitution mandamus investigation posts of Firem to examine/ 18.10.2022 to been made made by th advertisemen 1 555-2023 N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGA CWP Date o der Singh VERSUS f Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate for t Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab. REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been fil tution of India praying for issuance us directing respondents No.4 to gation with regard to irregularities in f Firemen and Drivers/Operators and mine/scrutinize the videos of the 022 to 22.10.2022, filmed by respond ade for directing respondents No.1 to by the petitioner (Annexure P-4) sement dated 28.01.2023 (Annexure P NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH CWP-26555-2023 Date of Decision: February 02, 2026 ....Petitioner SUS ...Responden HARPREET SINGH BRAR e for the petitioner. unjab. een filed under Article 226/227 of the suance of a writ in the nature of .4 to 6 to conduct proper and fair ties in the recruitment process for the s and further, to form an SIT in order f the physical test conducted on espondent No.3. Further, a prayer has o.1 to 6 to decide the representation 4) and to stay the operation of xure P-1). 2026 itioner ondents of the re of d fair or the order d on er has tation on of PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 2. respondent P-1) for filli Pursuant ther On 01.10.202 for the said 04.10.2023 (A score in the w qualified can from 18.10.2 test conducte petitioner no (Annexure P by grave irr certain candi assisted by conducting th grievance be detailed repre 3. petitioner has pleadings wh in the conduc 2 555-2023 Learned counsel for the petitio dent Nos. 1 to 3 issued an advertiseme or filling up a total of 1317 posts nt thereto, the petitioner applied for th 10.2023, the petitioner appeared in the said posts. After the examination, 023 (Annexure P-3). The petitioner se n the written examination and was acc ed candidates, making him eligible f 8.10.2023 to 23.10.2023. The petition nducted on 18.10.2023. During the c er noticed that the standards pre ure P-1) were not being adhered to a ve irregularities and chaos. Learned candidates were unable to climb th d by instructors, thereby receiving ting the test. Aggrieved thereby, the ce before the concerned officer a d representation dated 26.10.2023 (An On the other hand, learned S er has neither placed on record any gs which could even remotely sugge conduct of the physical test. The alle petitioner, inter alia, contends that tisement dated 28.01.2023 (Annexure posts of Firemen/Drivers/Operators. for the posts of Fireman and Driver. he written examination conducted ation, a merit list was published on oner secured the minimum benchmark as accordingly included in the list of gible for the physical test scheduled petitioner participated in the physical the course of the physical test, the s prescribed in the advertisement d to and that the process was marred earned counsel further submits that mb the rope on their own and were iving undue favour from the staff y, the petitioner immediately raised icer and subsequently submitted a 3 (Annexure P-4). ned State counsel submits that the d any material nor made any specific suggest any large-scale manipulation e allegations raised by the petitioner s that exure rators. river. ucted ed on hmark list of duled ysical st, the ement arred s that were staff ised a ted a at the ecific lation tioner PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 are based pur physical test recruitment a Department. manner, and further conte the petitione instructors or 4. record with failed to pla substantiate t the physical basis for judi 5. precedents on INSC 568, through Dr. position with following ter “61. T not ca that th 3 555-2023 ed purely on conjectures and surmises al test was not conducted by any unau ment agency; rather, it was conducted ment. The physical test was carried r, and the entire process was videog contends that the recruitment process titioner’s apprehension that certain tors or staff while climbing the rope du I have heard the learned counsel with their able assistance. This Cou to place any cogent material or subs tiate the allegations of irregularities o ysical test. Mere allegations, unsuppo or judicial interference in a recruitment Furthermore, after an exhau ents on the subject, in ‘Vanshika Ya 68, a three-Judge Bench of the Hon h Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, has n with respect to judicial interventio ing terms: 1. The facts of this case and the resu t call for the development of new le at the cancellation of an examinat rmises. It is further submitted that the y unauthorised or interested officer or ucted by officials of the Local Bodies arried out in a fair and transparent videographed. Learned State counsel process cannot be quashed merely on ertain candidates were assisted by ope during the physical test. ounsel for the parties and perused the is Court finds that the petitioner has r substantive evidence on record to rities or favouritism in the conduct of supported by proof, cannot form the itment process. exhaustive review of the earlier a Yadav Vs. Union of India’ 2024 e Hon’ble Supreme Court, speaking d, has conclusively settled the legal vention in selection processes in the resultant issue before this Court do w legal principles. It is settled law ination, either for the purposes of at the cer or odies parent unsel ely on ed by ed the er has ord to uct of m the earlier 024 aking legal in the t do law s of PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 gainin purpos cases w a syst examin author from th 62. In Supp S variou The p examin marks case, high m candid Upon cancel Allaha High C was n consid found set asi intervi place. not a s system Court, that it the na exam w 63. F Exami can be believe decidin extract 4 555-2023 ining admission into professional rpose of recruitment to a governm ses where the sanctity of the exam systemic level. Courts may dir amination or approve such can thority only if it is not possible to s om the untainted ones. . In Anamica Mishra v. U.P. Publ pp SCC 692 the recruitment proc rious educational services posts in e process consisted of two sta amination and an interview. Only th arks in the former were invited to p se, mistakes in data entry resulted gh marks being left out of the in ndidates who scored low marks were pon realising this error, the Stat ncelled the entire recruitment p lahabad upheld this decision. The ap igh Court was allowed by this Cour as no justification for cancellin nsidering that the errors were confi und that a more appropriate course t aside the selection of candidate terviews on the basis of the written ace. Hence, in that case, the Court t a suitable course of action to ca stemic issues persisted. Although ourt, a proper appreciation of the d at it considered whether a fresh exa e nature of grievance and the exten am was vitiated. . From the observations of th xamination Board v. Subhas Chand n be seen that the number or prop lieved to have indulged in malpr ciding cases such as the present one tracted below: "13. This is not a case of any pa onal and other courses or for the vernment post, is justified only in xam is found to be compromised at direct the cancellation of an cancellation by the competent e to separate the tainted candidates Public Service Commission, (1990) process concerning appointment to ts in Uttar Pradesh was cancelled. stages - a preliminary written ly those candidates who scored high to participate in the latter. In that lted in some candidates who scored e interview process even as other were interviewed and even selected. State Public Service Commissio nt process. The High Court of he appeal against the decision of the Court. This Court found that there celling the written examination, confined to the interview process. It ourse of action would have been to idates and conduct a fresh set of tten exam which had already taken ourt was of the opinion that it was o cancel an examination when no ugh not expressly stated by the he decision leads to the conclusion examination was proportionate to extent to which the integrity of the f this Court in Bihar School handra Sinha, (1970) 1 SCC 648 proportion of students who can be alpractice is a relevant factor in t one. The relevant observations are y particular individual who is being the y in d at an tent ates 990) t to lled. itten high that ored ther ted. sion t of f the here on, s. It n to t of ken was no the sion te to f the hool it n be r in are eing PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 64. In Prasar exam i Naib T studen distrib their b invigil copyin alterna difficu and th 65. In (2021) the iss the sco 5 555-2023 charged with adoption of unfair the examinees or at least a vast centre. If it is not a question of with unfair means but to c ineffective for the purpose it was . In Madhyamic Shiksha Manda asar Samiti, (1998) 9 SCC 236 am in that case cancelled the exam aib Tehsildar who had visited the e udents were copying even befo stributed and that they were permitt eir books and other material. Th vigilators and supervisors did nothin pying. This Court found that t ternative but to cancel the exam fficult to identify the students who d those who were not. . In Sachin Kumar v. Delhi Subord 021) 4 SCC 631 the Court analysed e issue before us and made the follo e scope of judicial review in such pro "56. The decisions in Railway Railway Recruitment Board v. K 614 : (2010) 2 SCC (L&S) 2 Hanubhai v. State of Gujarat, SCC (L&S) 80] and Kalaimani (2021) 16 SCC 217 : 2019 SC emphasise that a recruiting auth fide view, based on the mate process stands vitiated as a re process should be initiated. T process cannot be lightly dis substituting its own subjective o material which has been taken making authority. Undoubtedly participate in the process is an may be situations where cand irregularities can be identified authority to segregate the nfair means but of the conduct of all vast majority of them at a particular n of charging any one individually to condemn the examination as t was held ..." andal, M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha the Board concerned with the xam upon receiving a report from a the exam centre. He found that the before the question paper was rmitted to enter the exam hall with . The report also stated that the othing to prevent the students from at the Board was left with no xam and that it was exceedingly who were committing malpractice bordinate Service Selection Board, lysed multiple judgments related to following pertinent observations on h proceedings: way Recruitment Board [All India v. K. Shyam Kumar, (2010) 6 SCC S) 293] , Gohil [Gohil Vishvaraj rat, (2017) 13 SCC 621 : (2018) 1 ani [State of T.N. v. A Kalaimani, 9 SCC OnLine SC 1002] all go to authority is entitled to take a bona material before it, that the entire a result of which a fresh selection d. The integrity of the selection disregarded by the High Court ive opinion on the sufficiency of the aken into account by the decision tedly, fairness to candidates who s an important consideration. There candidates who have indulged in fied and it is then possible for the the tainted from the untainted f all ular ally as ksha the m a t the was with the rom no ngly ctice ard, d to s on ndia SCC araj 8) 1 ani, o to ona ntire tion tion ourt f the sion who here d in the nted PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 66. Th compr the exa examin require separa untain 67. In from w malpra includ be at conclu is not conclu level. H as bor Exami materi examin 6 555-2023 candidates. On the other hand, the nature of the irregularities m of candidates involved is of impossible to precisely delineat the untainted. A considered dec the material before it taken b interfered in the exercise of the p it stands vitiated on groun proportionality." . The purpose of testing whether the mpromised at a systemic level is to e exam which has already taken pl amination is a proportionate respon quired to assess the extent of t parately, consider whether it is po tainted candidates. A holistic view m In arriving at a conclusion as to w om widespread issues, courts mu alpractice are substantiated and cluding investigative reports, point at least some evidence to allo nclusion. This standard need not b not necessary for the material on r nclusion which is that malpractice vel. However, there must be a real borne out by the material before xamination Board (supra), this Cou aterial" must be present to ju aminations: "14. ... If at a centre the wh assistance and are managed neighbourhood of 100% when successful only at an average University or the Board must cannot hold a detailed quasi- ju alumni to plead and lead evide withheld or the examinations c material on which it can be de and, there may be situations where ies may be manifold and the number of such a magnitude that it is neate or segregate the tainted from decision of the authority based on n bona fide should not lightly be e powers of judicial review unless rounds of unreasonableness or r the integrity of the exam has been is to ensure that the cancellation of n place and the conduct of a fresh sponse. This is also why courts are of the use of unfair means and s possible to separate tainted and ew must be taken. to whether an examination suffers must ensure that allegations of nd that the material on record, oint to that conclusion. There must allow the Court to reach that ot be unduly strict. To elaborate, it on record to point to one and onl ctice has taken place at a systemic real possibility of systemic malaise efore the Court. In Bihar School s Court recognised that "sufficient o justify a decision to cancel e whole body of students receive aged to secure success in the when others at other centres are age of 50%, it is obvious that the ust do something in the matter. It judicial inquiry with a right to its vidence etc., before the results are ns cancelled. If there is sufficient e demonstrated that the university here ber it is from d on y be less or been n of resh are and and ffers s of ord, ust that te, it only emic laise hool ient ncel eive the are the r. It o its are ient rsity PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 68. In placed indicat that it copyin b. The 84. He indicat materi that th the int indicat cheat does n using commu which benefic being i who ar at this the be This be 6. present petit Constitution devoid of me 7 555-2023 was right in its conclusion tha cancelled then academic standa appreciation of the problem mus . In Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, aced great reliance on the report dicated that the students in question at it was not possible to separate the pying. xx The present case xx Hence, sufficient material is no dicates a systemic leak or systemic m aterial on record does not, at prese at there has been a widespread ma e integrity of the exam. To the contr dicates that there are no deviation eating has taken place. The inform es not show that the question pa ing social media or the internet, o mmunicated to students using so h may prove difficult to tra neficiaries of the leak at Hazariba ing identified. The CBI investigation o are the beneficiaries of the malpra this stage. This leads us to conclud e beneficiaries of malpractice or fr is being the case, the Court cannot In view of the above, this Court t petition warranting interference u tution of India. Accordingly, the presen of merit. that the examinations ought to be ndards require that the university's must be respected." ndal, M.P. (supra), too, the Court port of the Naib Tehsildar, which stion were copying unchecked and e them from the ones who were not xx xx xx xx s not on record at present which ic malpractice of other forms. The present, substantiate the allegation d malpractice which compromised contrary, an assessment of the data tions which indicate that systemic nformation before us at this stage n paper was disseminated widely et, or that the answers were being g sophisticated electronic means trace. The students who were aribagh and Patna are capable of ation reveals the number of students alpractice at Hazaribagh and Patna clude that it is possible to separate or fraud from the honest students. nnot direct a re-exam.” Court does not find any merit in the nce under Articles 226/227 of the present petition is dismissed as being o be ity's ourt hich and not hich The tion ised data emic tage idely eing eans ere e of ents na rate ents. in the f the being PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-26555 7. disposed of. February 0 P.C 8 555-2023 Pending miscellaneous applicat ed of. ary 02, 2026 Whether speaking/reasone Whether Reportable : pplication(s), if any, shall also stand (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE easoned. : Yes/No Yes/No stand RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.02.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document