Smelling a rat in the selection of 150 sub-inspectors made by Haryana in 2010,the Punjab and Haryana High Court today summoned answer sheets of the selected candidates. The Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) has been directed to produce the entire record in a sealed cover by the next date of hearing.
The Commission has also been directed to post the questions and their answers on its official website. These directions were passed on Tuesday during the resumed hearing of a petition filed by Pawan Bishnoi,resident of Mandi Dabwali through his counsel Sourabh Goel. The petitioner had challenged the selection process of 150 Sub Inspectors in 2011. The petitioner had alleged that the entire selection was arbitrary,illegal and unconstitutional.
Bishnoi had applied for the post of sub-inspector in July 2008 and had appeared in the written examination (objective type) on February 8,2009. The result was declared on February 14,2009,and he was called to undergo a physical test in which he was failed in the chest and height measurement.
Aggrieved against his exclusion,he moved the High Court which directed him to appear before a medical board. The petition was disposed of on May 30,2009,on the basis of Medical Fitness Certificate issued by the Medical Board which showed that he fulfilled the essential parameters of height and chest.
The HSSC was also directed to conduct the physical test of the petitioner,which he cleared.
The petitioner was called for interview on August 28,2009,and he gave answers to the satisfaction of the interview committee. The process for selection was completed in August 2009.
After waiting for three months and before the declaration of the final result,the petitioner filed an application on December 2,2009,seeking information under the Right to Information Act,2005,as well as copy of question paper and answer key of the written examination (objective type) as well as permission to inspect the OMR sheet (answer sheet).
However,the Public Information Officer refused to supply the information on the ground that the final result had not been declared.
Counsel contended that in spite of completion of selection process in August 2009,the final result was declared on September 9,2010. His name did not appear in the final list of selected candidates. The petitioner alleged that he was denied information under RTI. Advocate Goel contended that the Commission was evading the information regarding the selection process as the petitioner came to know that there was impersonation during the physical test and also that the answer sheets were tampered to favour certain students.