SC fiat setback for govt as 2011 KAS recruitment row under spotlight again

Bengaluru: The long-running controversy over the recruitment of 362 Karnataka Administrative Service (KAS) gazetted probationers selected in 2011 has put the government’s 2022 validation law under intense scrutiny. The case concerns the state government’s decision to enact legislation validating a selection process that had earlier been challenged over alleged irregularities.

According to the report supplied for this story, the Supreme Court has struck down the Karnataka Civil Services (Validation of Selection and Appointment of 2011 Batch Gazetted Probationers) Act, 2022. However, an independently verifiable copy of the October 29 judgment was not available in the sources checked, and the reported outcome requires confirmation against the court order.

The dispute dates back to November 3, 2011, when the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) invited applications for 362 Group A and Group B posts. Allegations of corruption and irregularities emerged during the recruitment process, leading the state government to order a CID investigation in 2014.

Following the investigation, the government decided to withdraw the selection list. The selected candidates challenged the decision before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, which initially directed the authorities to proceed with appointments. The matter subsequently reached the Karnataka High Court, which set aside the tribunal’s order and upheld the cancellation of the recruitment.

In March 2022, the state government enacted legislation to validate the selection of the 2011 batch and facilitate appointments. The law sought to restore the selection process despite earlier judicial orders concerning the recruitment.

The legislation itself became the subject of further legal challenges. Petitioners argued that the government could not use a law to overcome judicial decisions concerning alleged irregularities in the selection process. The state, on the other hand, defended its legislative action as a measure intended to protect selected candidates.

The case has remained significant because some candidates from the disputed selection process have already entered government service, while others have continued to seek appointment. Any final judicial decision affecting the validity of the law could have implications for their service status and the state’s recruitment procedures.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Hans India