DGP gets contempt notice over bogus expert report
Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com
Chennai:03,04,2019
J K Tripathy, an officer in the rank of director general of police, has landed in hot water with the Madras high court. The court has initiated suo motu contempt of court proceedings against him for having filed a bogus expert opinion in court to deny appointment to an eligible candidate for a sub-inspector post.
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), of which Tripathy is chairperson, filed an ‘expert report’ in the high court claiming that IIT Madras professor D Moorthy had prepared it. But when verified, it was revealed that IIT-M did not have a faculty member by that name on its rolls and that Moorthy was a retired school teacher, who was merely asked by the TNUSRB to solve a mathematics problem. On Tuesday, after initiating contempt proceedings, Justice S M Subramaniam issued a statutory notice to Tripathy and directed the registry to list the case on April 5 when the officer would have to appear in person.
“It is unfortunate to state that such a bogus expert opinion obtained by way of impersonation was knowingly filed by the board. Therefore, the officials of the board are certainly responsible and accountable for the act which has resulted in denial of justice to the litigant. This not only amounts to interference with the administration of justice but also miscarriage of justice,” Justice Subramaniam said.
However, in a boon to the petitioner, the board submitted that it would give half a mark to all nine aggrieved people, including petitioner S Arunachalam, and include their names on the provisional list for appointment.
The issue pertains to a recruitment drive for sub-inspector (finger print) in 2018. Arunachalam, a grade-II constable, applied for the post but missed selection by half a mark. Aggrieved, he approached the high court alleging that he missed out on the score due to a wrong answer key. However, based on the ‘expert opinion’ produced by the board, Arunachalam’s plea was dismissed.
Subsequently, when Arunachalam found that there was no ‘expert’ identified as ‘Professor’ D Moorthy at IIT-M, he brought it to the court’s attention. The board also admitted that the ‘opinion’ was bogus and informed the court that criminal cases had been initiated against G V Kumar, who, the board said, was instrumental in obtaining the opinion.
In his affidavit, Moorthy said he was unaware that his ‘opinion’ would be filed before the court. He said: “Kumar was my professor in Madras University. He called me over phone and requested (that I) solve the mathematics problem. I solved it and sent it via-WhatsApp. Thereafter, Kumar requested me to visit the office of the member-secretary. There I was asked by the personal assistant of the IG to solve the problem on a blank sheet which was later printed and on which I was told to affix my signature. But when I signed it, nothing other than my name was found on the sheet. The designation ‘professor IIT-M’ had been inserted in the office of the IG.”
When the court asked about Kumar’s relationship with the board, N K Senthamaraikannan, an IG rank officer and membersecretary of the board, told the court that Kumar was a consultant hired by the Board to prepare question papers.
It is unfortunate to state that such a bogus expert opinion obtained by way of impersonation was knowingly filed by the board... The act has resulted in denial of justice to the litigant
Justice Subramaniam |
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com
Chennai:03,04,2019
J K Tripathy, an officer in the rank of director general of police, has landed in hot water with the Madras high court. The court has initiated suo motu contempt of court proceedings against him for having filed a bogus expert opinion in court to deny appointment to an eligible candidate for a sub-inspector post.
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), of which Tripathy is chairperson, filed an ‘expert report’ in the high court claiming that IIT Madras professor D Moorthy had prepared it. But when verified, it was revealed that IIT-M did not have a faculty member by that name on its rolls and that Moorthy was a retired school teacher, who was merely asked by the TNUSRB to solve a mathematics problem. On Tuesday, after initiating contempt proceedings, Justice S M Subramaniam issued a statutory notice to Tripathy and directed the registry to list the case on April 5 when the officer would have to appear in person.
“It is unfortunate to state that such a bogus expert opinion obtained by way of impersonation was knowingly filed by the board. Therefore, the officials of the board are certainly responsible and accountable for the act which has resulted in denial of justice to the litigant. This not only amounts to interference with the administration of justice but also miscarriage of justice,” Justice Subramaniam said.
However, in a boon to the petitioner, the board submitted that it would give half a mark to all nine aggrieved people, including petitioner S Arunachalam, and include their names on the provisional list for appointment.
The issue pertains to a recruitment drive for sub-inspector (finger print) in 2018. Arunachalam, a grade-II constable, applied for the post but missed selection by half a mark. Aggrieved, he approached the high court alleging that he missed out on the score due to a wrong answer key. However, based on the ‘expert opinion’ produced by the board, Arunachalam’s plea was dismissed.
Subsequently, when Arunachalam found that there was no ‘expert’ identified as ‘Professor’ D Moorthy at IIT-M, he brought it to the court’s attention. The board also admitted that the ‘opinion’ was bogus and informed the court that criminal cases had been initiated against G V Kumar, who, the board said, was instrumental in obtaining the opinion.
In his affidavit, Moorthy said he was unaware that his ‘opinion’ would be filed before the court. He said: “Kumar was my professor in Madras University. He called me over phone and requested (that I) solve the mathematics problem. I solved it and sent it via-WhatsApp. Thereafter, Kumar requested me to visit the office of the member-secretary. There I was asked by the personal assistant of the IG to solve the problem on a blank sheet which was later printed and on which I was told to affix my signature. But when I signed it, nothing other than my name was found on the sheet. The designation ‘professor IIT-M’ had been inserted in the office of the IG.”
When the court asked about Kumar’s relationship with the board, N K Senthamaraikannan, an IG rank officer and membersecretary of the board, told the court that Kumar was a consultant hired by the Board to prepare question papers.
It is unfortunate to state that such a bogus expert opinion obtained by way of impersonation was knowingly filed by the board... The act has resulted in denial of justice to the litigant
Justice Subramaniam |
MADRAS HIGH COURT
No comments:
Post a Comment