Haryana recruitment scam: OMR sheets, roll Nos. not recovered, court slams IO

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, November 29

Congress general secretary Randeep Surjewala today alleged cover-up in the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) recruitment scam, where Haryana Civil Services officer Anil Nagar has been named the main accused.

At a press meet here, Surjewala said the State Vigilance Bureau (SVB) was trying to bury the investigation just like what had been done in the previous Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) scam.

HPSC: New firm handling portal

• After Congress leader Randeep Surjewala’s press conference, the HPSC said, “The application portal was managed by TCS. Now, the work has been given to another company through a tendering process.”
• It added, “The scanning work is confidential and is looked after by either the secretary or deputy secretary. In case of the HCS and dental exams, the work of scanning was done in the presence of a committee headed by the deputy secretary.”
• On paper leaks, it said, “In case of the Haryana Public Service Commission, there has been no paper leak in the past seven years.” — TNS

The court of the Panchkula Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nitin Raj, had recently come down heavily on the Investigating Officer (IO) of the HPSC scam over non-recovery of copies of roll numbers and OMR sheets of candidates who appeared in a dental surgeon examination and pre-examination of Haryana Civil Services (HCS).

Surjewala questioned that on whose instructions a private firm, Safedot E Solution Pvt Ltd, got the contract of online applications for the HPSC recruitments. He pointed out that the FIR and remand applications mentioned allegations against the private firm.

“The HPSC’s former chairman had dis-empanelled the firm, but incumbent chairman Alok Verma approved it again. Why has he not been questioned yet?” Surjewala said.

He also questioned the SVB for not questioning or raiding other accused in the case.

He pointed out anomalies in the remand applications of accused Anil Nagar, Ashwani Sharma and Naveen Kumar, after which the court denied their police custody on November 23. The court had observed that on the previous hearing on November 19 too, the IO had sought Nagar’s remand to recover documents from Rohtak and the HPSC office in Panchkula. But when the IO was asked to produce the DDR entry of the local police station regarding his visit to Rohtak, “he had expressed inability to furnish it”, the court had observed, adding that one-day remand of Ashwani and Naveenwas also taken on November 22 on the pretext that documents were to be recovered from Solan, but the IO again failed to furnish the DDR entries.

Reading out the court observations, Surjewala said: “The court observed that the IO had said though he was heading the SIT constituted to probe the matter, another IO would be able to explain why the accused were not taken to Rohtak and Solan on availing police remand of the accused on November 19. In view of this observation, the plea of counsel for the defence that the IO is not serious in the recovery of articles and only interested in keeping the accused in custody attains gravity.”

He said when a lower court had denied police custody of the accused, why the order was not challenged in a higher court.