Apex court refuses status quo on KPSC-selected candidates

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to maintain status quo on a plea by a group of KPSC- selected candidates, facing risk of losing their job.

The Karnataka High Court had on March 9 set aside the directions to issue appointment letters to 362 people for the post of gazetted probationer group 'A' and 'B' for the 2011 batch. A bench of Justices Adarsh K Goel and U U Lalit, however, said the apex court would hear next Tuesday, March 27, a special leave petition filed by 25 such candidates who were issued appointment letters and joined duties.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, along with other counsel Ranjit Kumar, A M Singhvi and B V Acharya, appearing for the selected candidates, challenged the High Court directions. "We were selected and notified. The government sought to cancel the selection en masse. We challenged it before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal and succeeded. But the HC, acting on a PIL, cancelled it. There is a long line of the apex court judgements which stated that normally attempt has to be made to separate grain from the chaff," they said. Though the government has said that there were only 46 candidates who were tainted out of 362 selected ones, the high court went ahead to rescind the whole process. Out of 316 untainted candidates, 25 were issued appointment letters and they joined the duty, the counsel said.

The counsel sought direction to the state government not to relieve those candidates, who had reported at various posts, saying they have been granted protection under Article 311 of the Constitution by which no member of civil service can be removed or dismissed without an enquiry or having been heard.

"No status quo, let the government take any action. We will hear the matter on next Tuesday," the bench said, directing  them to serve the copy of the petition to the state government counsel.

The petitioners, led by Avinash C and others contended they had played no role in manipulation or interference into the selection process.

The state government, on August 14, 2014, withdrew its 2011 notification after the CID had submitted a report in 2013, pointing to large-scale irregularities in the selection process. After the KAT quashed the withdrawal of notification on October 19, 2016, the state government preferred not to file appeal and issued appointment letters this year.