Karnataka High Court Forms SIT for KPSC Recruitment Probe, Rejects CBI Transfer

BENGALURU: In a significant move to restore public faith in constitutional recruitment processes, the Karnataka High Court on Monday constituted a five-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe alleged large-scale irregularities in the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC). The court declined to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), opting instead for a specially constituted team to ensure both independence and speed.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, hearing a batch of petitions including those filed by BJP MLA Basanagouda R. Patil (Yatnal) and the All Karnataka State Students Association, ordered the formation of the SIT led by Sri Alok Kumar, IPS, Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services. The team also includes Dr. Divya Gopinath, IPS, and Deputy Commissioners of Police Anup Shetty, Kushal Chouksay, and Kshama Mishra.

A Troubled History

The court meticulously catalogued a decades-long history of controversies dogging the KPSC, from the 1998-99 Gazetted Probationers selection to the more recent 2026 Veterinary Officer recruitment. The immediate trigger was the allegation that suspended KPSC Chairman Shivashankarappa S. Sahukar manipulated the selection process to benefit his two daughters under the OBC category, allegedly using false income certificates.

Two FIRs—Crime No. 78 of 2026 (relating to Industrial Extension Officer recruitment) and Crime No. 89 of 2026 (relating to Veterinary Officer recruitment)—were under investigation by the Vidhana Soudha Police and the CID respectively. Petitioners argued that the state machinery could not be trusted to investigate impartially, given the involvement of senior officials and the commission's leadership.

Balance Between Independence and Expediency

While the State Public Prosecutor argued that handing over every case to the CBI would demoralise state forces, the court acknowledged the need for an investigation that inspires confidence. However, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that CBI investigations often take considerable time, leaving thousands of aspirants in limbo.

“Every passing month may leave hundreds of aspirants suspended between hope and uncertainty; age limits may overtake some, other opportunities may disappear for others, and an entire recruitment may remain frozen in litigation. Justice to job aspirants cannot be rendered, after their opportunity itself has withered away,” the court observed.

Rejecting both the continuation of the CID probe and a transfer to the CBI, the court exercised its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to constitute the SIT.

Key Observations

The court made several powerful observations on the significance of public recruitment:

“When marks are manipulated, answer scripts or OMR sheets are tampered with, selections are purchased, or nepotism and favouritism creep into the process, the fraud is not merely upon an unsuccessful candidate; it is a fraud upon the Constitution itself.”

“A recruitment scam in a Public Service Commission in particular is not merely a theft of post; it is a theft of equality of opportunity.”

“A constitutional institution entrusted with selecting the servants of the State must, therefore, remain like Caesar’s wife—above suspicion.”

The SIT's Mandate

The SIT has been directed to conduct a de novo investigation into both FIRs and all matters legitimately arising. It must complete its investigation and submit a final report within 100 days, with progress reports every 30 days. The CID and local police must hand over all collected evidence within one week. The SIT is also required to cooperate with the Enforcement Directorate, which has registered a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Significantly, the court directed that the investigation “shall not be confined or shackled by the persons presently named, the allegations presently made or the contours presently perceived.” This empowers the SIT to follow the evidence wherever it leads.

The connected criminal petitions seeking quashing of the FIRs against selected candidates will be considered only after the SIT submits its report.

The order underscores the court's determination to protect the constitutional guarantee of equal opportunity in public employment. The SIT now has the task of unearthing the truth in one of Karnataka's most serious recruitment scandals, with a strict deadline to ensure swift justice for thousands of aspirants.