CBI makes headway in recovering OMR sheets from Ghaziabad in an examination fraud case. Anindya Mitra, legal representative for implicated job recipients, questions CBI’s operations in a Calcutta High Court hearing.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
KOLKATA: Today(12th March), The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has made significant progress by recovering examination answer sheets, known as OMR sheets, from Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.
During a hearing at the Calcutta High Court, Anindya Mitra, the lawyer representing the controversial job recipients, raised several questions regarding the CBI’s operations. Mitra questioned the basis and intentions behind the CBI’s Ghaziabad operation, specifically asking:
“Why did the CBI go to Ghaziabad? On what basis is the CBI’s Ghaziabad operation?”
ALSO READ: Calcutta High Court:15 Incorrect Questions in ‘2022 TET Exam’ – Seeks Permanent Solution From Board
His inquiries did not stop there; he further probed:
“Why did the Central Investigation Agency go to the house of former officer Pankaj Bansal instead of going to the NISA office?”
The skepticism extended beyond the CBI’s actions, as Mitra also expressed doubts regarding the ‘instructions’ given by retired Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, questioning the harsh measures like the order for salary refunds for those found to have received jobs controversially.
The division bench of Justice Debanshu Basak and Justice Mohammad Shabbar Rosidi, hearing the SSC case, faced challenging questions from the job seekers’ side. They were confronted with the statement:
“Why has retired Justice Gangopadhyay given strict orders like salary refund? Would you have given such an order?”
In response, the bench acknowledged the complexity of the situation, hinting at the possibility of having been more vocal about custodial interrogation.
Addressing the bench’s inquiries, lawyer Anindya Mitra presented a nuanced argument, stating:
“Even if it is assumed that a qualified person has got a job illegally but has worked diligently and competently, can he be asked to return his salary?”
This question highlights the moral and legal dilemmas faced by the court in dealing with the ramifications of the recruitment scandal.
Furthermore, the issue of the 23 lakh OMR sheets came under scrutiny during the hearing. The School Service Commission admitted to the court that not all of these sheets had been examined, only those that the CBI had permitted. The court, pondering the logistical challenges, inquired:
“If re-examination of 23 lakh OMR sheets is ordered, is it possible?” indicating the massive scale of the investigation and the potential for further complications.
The next hearing scheduled for Wednesday.
