The Supreme Court on Thursday (October 29) has struck down the Karnataka Civil Services (Validation of Selection and Appointment of 2011 Batch Gazetted Probationers) Act, 2022, which sought to validate a recruitment process for Karnataka Civil Services posts that had earlier been cancelled over allegations of rampant corruption and nepotism.

“…nothing remains to be looked into to sustain the recruitment of 2011 which has been set aside not merely on defect or irregularity noticed in the process, but on rampant corruption and blatant nepotism having vitiated the entire selection. There could be no equity, insofar as the selected candidates are concerned, especially the selection being based on a recruitment which is declared as tainted by the Constitutional Courts and the appointment having been effectuated based on a stillborn legislation; the Act of 2022.”, the Court said.

The Court held that the State Legislature could not enact a law to nullify judicial decisions unless the very basis of the judgment was removed, while upholding the cancellation of the tainted recruitment.

“While making a law retrospectively and validating it, notwithstanding the decision of a Court of law, it is permissible to alter the very basis of an earlier decision but cannot directly annul the final judgment by a subsequent legislation, which act of the legislature would be declared unconstitutional.”, the Court said.

A bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran directed the State Government to initiate fresh recruitment for the vacant Group A and Group B posts, granting a one-time age relaxation to candidates from the 2011 recruitment, including those whose appointments were made under the invalidated law.

“…we would only direct the State Government to notify the recruitment for the vacant posts, remaining as of now in the Group 'A' and 'B' services as per the presently existing recruitment rules in which the appointed candidates who were not found tainted and the six appellants herein, as also the petitioners in the pending proceedings before the KAT, be granted age relaxation to appear in the recruitment process as a one-time opportunity, along with other candidates now eligible. If selected, we make it clear that their seniority shall be only from the date of appointment and they shall not be entitled to any back wages or notional appointment, from an earlier point of time.”, the Court ordered.

In November 2011, the Karnataka Government notified recruitment to 362 Group A and Group B gazetted probationer posts under the Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997. More than 1.38 lakh candidates applied.

In 2013, the State withheld publication of the final select list following complaints of irregularities and ordered a CID inquiry. The investigation revealed serious allegations of manipulation, corruption and nepotism involving officials of the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC).

The recruitment was subsequently cancelled. The Karnataka High Court upheld the cancellation, and the Supreme Court refused to interfere with that decision.

The courts had found evidence of improper evaluation, including identical interview marks awarded to numerous candidates and the replacement of a digital video recorder at the KPSC building, which raised concerns about the destruction of evidence.

The candidates later sought to revive the recruitment from the written examination stage, but their plea was rejected.

In 2022, more than a decade after the recruitment notification, the State enacted the Karnataka Civil Services (Validation of Selection and Appointment of 2011 Batch Gazetted Probationers) Act to validate the selection and appointments. The legislation proceeded on the premise that the candidates should not suffer for irregularities allegedly committed by KPSC officials, particularly when the candidates themselves had not been arraigned as accused.

The validity of the Act was challenged before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal and the High Court. The matter eventually reached the Supreme Court by the untainted candidates, i.e., the petitioners herein.

While striking down the 2022 state legislation, the judgment authored by Justice Chandran held that even the untainted candidates cannot benefit from the law which was enacted to nullify the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court, which affirmed the High Court's decision to nullify the recruitment process. Since the very basis of the judgment was not removed, the Court said that the Act tends to annul the final judgment, which is impermissible, rendering the 2022 Act to be unconstitutional, and the subsequent appointment based on this unconstitutional Act to be also vitiated.

“More importantly, the appointment of the selected candidates was only by virtue of the impugned legislation which we have found to be unconstitutional.”, the Court said.

The Court further clarified that “insofar as the persons who are continuing now, if selected, then their seniority shall also be only from the date of their fresh appointment as per the selection and recruitment directed by us. However, if the persons working now gets selected and appointed, the period they have been in service pursuant to their earlier appointment shall be reckoned for computation of their pension and retirement benefits.”

As a result, the appeal was allowed in the aforesaid terms.

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Puneet Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikram Phadke, Adv. Mr. Ashwin V. Kotemath, Adv. Mr. Yashvardhan Singh, Adv. Mr. Om Sudhir Vidyarthi, Adv. Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Jain, Adv. Mr. Harisha S.R.- 2761, AOR

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anand Sanjay M Nuli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prateek Chhadha, A.A.G. Mr. Rajesh Gulab Inamdar, AOR Mr. Shashwat Anand, Adv. Ms. Rakshita Singh, Adv. Mr. Sreekar Aechuri, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Soni, Adv. Mr. Aniket Chauhaan, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Pahwa, Adv. Ms. Akhila Wali, Adv. Mr. Shyam Gupta, Adv. Mr. Kunwar Aditya Singh, Adv. M/S. Nuli & Nuli- 2021, AOR Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Adv. Mr. Arpit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Rangoli Seth, AOR