HC relief for software firm in TET fraud case

The Bombay High Court on Friday quashed a notice issued to a software company that had terminated its services on the ground that one of its directors was booked for committing fraud in the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET). The HC said that this wasn’t any ground for the Maharashtra State Council of Examination (MSCE) to terminate the contract.

A bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav Jamdar was hearing a plea filed by Winner Software Pvt. Ltd. challenging the notice issued by MSCE by which it terminated its agreement signed in February last year.

The firm was roped in for providing services to conduct Optical Mark reading (OMR) for the state-based scholarship examination for students of Classes 5 and 8 in the National Talent Examination (NTE) and National Means-cum-Merit scholarship, and also some other examinations.

The bench noted that the MSCE terminated the services with no “forewarning”, let alone a show cause notice or a hearing. “This was done ostensibly invoking the convenience clause of the contract. The only basis was that one of the company’s directors was named as an accused in a criminal complaint registered by the cyber police, Pune, while he was a director of some other company and in respect of that other company,” the

The firm was roped in for providing services to conduct OMR for the state-based scholarship examination for students of Classes 5 and 8 in the NTE and National Means-cumMerit scholarship

bench noted in its orders. The judges noted, “That allegation related to certain alleged malpractices and fraud in the TET examination. That was also historical at a remote point in time, 2017-2018.”

“We do not see how it is possible for either of the authorities to dredge up some historical thing that may have happened against one particular director on account of his association with some other entity,” the bench noted. “…We, therefore, are compelled to see this as a straightforward violation of Article 14 on the ground of irrationality, unreasonableness and arbitrariness…,” the bench held.