Karnataka High Court Seeks State’s Reply on Plea for CBI Probe into Alleged KPSC Recruitment Irregularities
The Karnataka High Court has issued notice to the State Government on a public interest petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into alleged large-scale irregularities and nepotism in recruitments conducted by the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC). The petition contends that serious allegations involving conflict of interest, favouritism and manipulation in the selection process warrant an investigation by an independent central agency.
The plea has been filed against the backdrop of mounting controversy surrounding the functioning of the KPSC, particularly allegations involving its Chairman, Shivashankarappa S. Sahukar. The petitioner has claimed that public confidence in the constitutional recruitment body has been severely eroded and that an impartial investigation is essential to ensure transparency and accountability in public appointments.
Taking note of the allegations, the High Court directed the State to file its response before proceeding further with the matter. At this stage, the Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the accusations or on the demand for a CBI probe, but has sought the Government’s stand on the issues raised in the petition.
The PIL comes amid a series of legal proceedings concerning the KPSC Chairman. Earlier this month, Governor Thawarchand Gehlot suspended Sahukar following allegations that he failed to disclose a conflict of interest while his daughters participated in recruitment processes conducted by the Commission. Sahukar has challenged the suspension before the Karnataka High Court, arguing that the Governor acted without complying with the constitutional procedure under Article 317 of the Constitution. The High Court has separately sought the State’s response in those proceedings as well.
The controversy has also led to judicial scrutiny of internal resolutions passed by KPSC members seeking the Chairman’s resignation. In related proceedings, the High Court granted interim relief by staying parts of those resolutions while clarifying that the Commission’s routine functioning should not be disrupted pending adjudication of the dispute.
The latest PIL seeks broader judicial intervention, contending that the alleged irregularities extend beyond individual appointments and may have compromised the integrity of multiple recruitment exercises. The petitioner has urged the Court to entrust the investigation to the CBI, arguing that an independent probe alone can restore public confidence in the recruitment process. The matter will now proceed after the State Government files its reply, following which the High Court will decide whether further directions, including a CBI investigation, are warranted.
