Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
N. KUMAR & B. VEERAPPA, JJ.
Khaleel Ahmed K.R. & Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of Karnataka Rep. by its Chief Secretary Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore – Respondent
W.P. Nos. 27674, 27730, 41366, 43718-43720, 43732 of 2012 & W.P. Nos. 1733, 4297 of 2013 (GM-PIL)
Decided On : 21-06-2016
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Article 320: [N. Kumar & B. Veerappa, JJ] Recruitment by Public Service Commission - Facts and reports revealing functions of PSC in recent years, as contrary to constitutional mandate - Persons behind were Chairman, Secretary and officials of PSC - Government thus constituted Committee to make recommendations, to conduct free and fair selection while making recruitment to posts in State Civil Services - Committee recommended framing/amending Rules to avoid repetition of mistakes - High Court therefore directed the Government to implement said recommendation by comprehensively amending Rules without any delay.
LABOUR & SERVICES - Appointment: [N. Kumar & B. Veerappa, JJ] Appointment of Gazetted officers - Competitive examination - Karnataka State Civil Services Act (14 of 1990), Section 8 - Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997, Rule 4, Schedule 2 - ’Government Order No. DPAR 2 SBC 94, dated 03.05.1994 - Preparation of eligibility list of candidates to be admitted to written examination and for personality test - Applying ratio erroneously and contrary to Rules - Resulting in denial of opportunity to certain number of candidates on merit - Seriously affecting their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16(1) of Constitution and also under Rules and Government order - However High Court declined to set aside thye entire selection of years in question - Public Service Commission was directed to prepare list as per ratio mentioned in Rules/Government order.
LABOUR & SERVICES - Appointment: [N. Kumar & B. Veerappa, JJ] Appointment of Gazetted officers - Karnataka State Civil Services Act (14 of 1990), Section 8: Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997, Rule 4, Schedule 2 - ’Government Order No. DPAR 2 SBC 94, dated 03.05.1994 - Written examination/personality test - Moderation of marks - Direction by High Court for random review to extent of 10%, i.e., 5% top level answer scripts and overall random review of 10% by public service commission, PSC - Affirmed by Supreme Court - However PSC subjected more than 10% of prescribed answer sheets i. e. 91 papers to moderation - Held, Action of PSC, held illegal.
LABOUR & SERVICES - Appointment: [N. Kumar & B. Veerappa, JJ] Appointment of Gazetted officers - Selection process by PSC - Challenged before Tribunal - Pendency - By virtue of interim orders provisional list and final list was published by PSC - Thus in such circumstances destroying answer sheets of candidates of the year in question was not proper - However mala fides being unsubstantiated - High Court in facts defined to set aside the entire selection of particular years, as candidates who were selected were in no way responsible for such destruction.
LABOUR & SERVICES - Appointment: [N. Kumar & B. Veerappa, JJ] Appointment of Gazetted officers - Karnataka State Civil Services Act (14 of 1990), Section 8 - Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997, Rule 4, Schedule 2 - ’Government Order No. DPAR 2 SBC 94, dated 03.05.1994 - Preparation of list of eligible candidate for written examination/personality test - Erroneous application of ratio - Candidates having no requisite merit permitted to participate in selection process - High Court in earlier proceedings directed for preparation of revised list - Petitioners agitating matter in different forum - Held, Revised list cannot be rejected merely because years have elapsed. Thus said list has to be given effect to.
1. A classic case of white coloured, educated, highly placed men holding responsible posts in the administration, betraying the confidence reposed in them by the public of Karnataka is the subject matter of these proceedings. Behind the scene, how fraud, illegality, irregularity, deceit, is practiced to manipulate the results of the examination, and some of the selected candidates even before they are born in the cadre, are suffering from the vice of corruption, nepotism, casteism. The facts set out herein will unravel this sordid state of affairs in the Karnataka Public Service Commission, a premier, constitutional authority, constituted to recruit educated people to Civil Services, which is the subject matter of this public interest litigation.
2. The petitioners have preferred these writ petitions seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the endorsement dated 09.07.2012 at Annexure N issued by the 2nd respondent, a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to reconsider the representation at Annexure-L made by them in the light of the final report of investigation submitted by the CID at Annexure – J and to direct the respondents to take appropriate steps/actions with regard to the vitiated selection process of 1998, 1999 and 2004, Gazetted Group A and B posts.
3. The said writ petitions are filed in the nature of class action or in public interest. Before we deal with the issues arising in these cases for a proper appreciation, it is necessary to notice the background of this litigation.
4. Karnataka Public Service Commission (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘the KPSC’) issued a notification dated 09.03.1998 inviting applications for recruitment to the posts of Gazetted Probationers (Group A and B posts) in pursuance of a request of the State Government made on 04.02.1998 to select 415 candidates for Group A and Group B posts. In response to the said notification, KPSC received 85,598 applications. On scrutiny, 79,130 candidates were found eligible for preliminary examination. The mode of selection to these posts is governed by the Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examination) Rules, 1997 (for short ‘the Recruitment Rules’) made by the Government of Karnataka in exercise of power under Section 3(1) read with Section 8 of the Karnataka State Civil Services Act, 1978.
5. Rule 4 of the Recruitment Rules requires that a combined competitive examination for recruitment to one or more of the services or group of posts (mentioned in Schedule 1 to the Rules) shall be held every year, subject to availability of vacancies, in the manner set out in Schedule II to the Rules. As per the scheme of examination contained in Schedule II to the Rules, the competitive examination comprises of two stages viz.
1. Preliminary examination (Objective Type) for selection of candidates for the main examination;
2. Main examination (written examination and personality test) for selection of candidates for various services and posts.
6. The preliminary examination was held on 30.08.1998 and 56,228 candidates appeared for the said examination. The results of the preliminary examination were announced by KPSC on 16.11.1998 and 9,857 candidates were declared eligible for the main examination, keeping in view the prescribed ratio of 1:20 and also to accommodate the candidates belonging to SC, ST and OB classes in the same ratio. The main examination was held between 09.04.1999 and 03.05.1999. On 12.1.2000 the results of the main examination were announced and 2,397 candidates were qualified for personality test (interview). Keeping in view the ratio of 1:5 and accommodating the same ratio of number of candidates belonging to SC, ST and OB classes. 1,209 candidates who had failed in the compulsory papers (Kannada and English) were not considered for ranking. The personality test which was
gpt-4
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
