The Karnataka High Court has directed the state government to immediately operationalise the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted to investigate alleged irregularities in Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) recruitments. The court questioned why the investigation had not progressed despite the Supreme Court upholding the SIT probe on October 13.
Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that the government could notify the SIT as a police station and authorise its designated Superintendent of Police to take custody of investigation records from the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), without waiting for the appointment of the team’s head.
The court made it clear that the pending dispute over the replacement of two SIT members could not justify delaying the investigation.
It directed the government to complete the necessary formalities before Friday, warning that appropriate orders would follow if the SIT was not notified as a police station.
Supreme Court Order Leaves No Obstacle to SIT Investigation
During the hearing, Justice Nagaprasanna sought an explanation from Advocate General K Shashi Kiran Shetty regarding the steps taken after the Supreme Court’s October 13 order.
The Advocate General acknowledged that the government had neither notified the SIT nor initiated the transfer of investigation records from the CID.
The court expressed concern over the lack of progress in a case involving serious allegations of recruitment irregularities. It observed that the Supreme Court had upheld the direction for an SIT investigation and had permitted reconsideration only of two members, including the team’s head.
Justice Nagaprasanna emphasised that deciding the leadership of the investigation team and making it operational were separate issues. The state could proceed with the administrative arrangements necessary for the investigation while the proposed changes in the team’s composition remained under consideration.
The court also referred to the Supreme Court’s observations concerning the seriousness of the allegations and the possible involvement of public functionaries, which warranted an investigation by senior police officers.
Court Seeks Objections to Proposed SIT Members
The Advocate General submitted a sealed-cover list of officers proposed to replace two SIT members in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions.
The High Court directed the government to provide the petitioners with its October 25 communication containing the proposed names.
Advocates Girish Bharadwaj and Venkatesh Dalwai, appearing for the petitioners, were given two days to submit objections.
During the proceedings, the court also examined the ranks of officers included in the government’s proposed list. It questioned the inclusion of officers below the rank of Additional Director General of Police (ADGP).
Following discussions regarding eligibility and seniority, the Advocate General agreed not to pursue the portion of the list containing officers of Inspector General of Police (IGP) rank.
The court said it would consider the proposed composition of the SIT at the next hearing after examining the petitioners’ objections.
KPSC Recruitment Case Involves Arrests of Senior Officials
The investigation concerns alleged irregularities in recruitment conducted by the Karnataka Public Service Commission.
Those arrested in connection with the case include KPSC chairman Shivashankarappa S Sahukar, commission member B V Geetha, former examination controller Gyanendra Kumar Gangwar and middleman Basavaraj Kannale.
Sahukar faces allegations of securing the illegal selection of his daughters as Industrial Officers. The case also involves allegations of widespread irregularities in the recruitment of veterinary doctors.
Sahukar has been suspended, while the Karnataka government has granted permission to prosecute Gangwar, an IAS officer.
The High Court constituted the SIT to investigate the allegations. The Enforcement Directorate is also conducting a parallel investigation.
The matter will be heard again on Friday, when the High Court will review the government’s compliance with its directions and consider the objections concerning the SIT’s composition.
