The Karnataka High Court has ruled in favour of candidates involved in the recruitment of Motor Vehicle Inspectors, holding that the required work experience can be considered on a combined basis when the workshops where candidates worked collectively dealt with the prescribed categories of vehicles. The Court also held that candidates cannot be denied appointment merely because their experience certificates do not show work on Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) and Heavy Passenger Vehicles (HPVs) fitted with petrol engines.
A Division Bench comprising Justice R. Devdas and Justice Dr. K. Manmadha Rao pronounced the judgment on October 6, 2026, while deciding a batch of connected writ petitions concerning the 2016 recruitment process.
The recruitment process was initiated through a notification dated February 4, 2016, for filling 150 posts of Motor Vehicle Inspectors in the Karnataka Transport Department. The prescribed qualification included at least one year of work experience in a reputed automobile workshop undertaking repairs of Light Motor Vehicles, Heavy Goods Vehicles and Heavy Passenger Vehicles fitted with petrol and diesel engines.
The recruitment had already been the subject of earlier litigation. In 2021, the High Court directed the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) to consider the candidates' experience certificates and proceed with the recruitment under the original 2016 notification. A revised final selection list was subsequently issued on October 26, 2023. However, several candidates were still denied appointment following verification of their experience certificates.
One of the main questions before the High Court was whether a candidate was required to possess one year's experience separately in every prescribed category of vehicle. The Court found that the wording of the recruitment requirement was ambiguous and said it could not reasonably be interpreted as demanding one full year of experience in each of the three vehicle categories.
The Bench observed:
“Therefore, when there is ambiguity or vagueness in the relevant provision, in prescribing the qualification, then the benefit should be given to the candidates instead of rejecting their candidature.”
The Court upheld the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal's view that combined experience acquired in different workshops could satisfy the requirement where the workshops collectively dealt with all three prescribed categories and the candidate's combined experience was more than one year.
The Court separately considered candidates whose appointments had been withheld because their experience certificates did not show work on HGVs and HPVs with petrol engines. The Bench noted that there had been no petrol-engine vehicles in these categories in India for several decades.
The Court found it unreasonable for authorities to accept certificates from State transport corporations claiming such experience while rejecting candidates whose certificates did not mention it. It held that candidates should not be denied appointment on the ground that they lacked experience with HGVs or HPVs having petrol engines.
The High Court dismissed the State’s petition and allowed the candidates’ petitions, quashing the relevant KSAT orders. It directed appointment of eligible candidates named in the Revised Final Select List dated October 26, 2023, with applicable benefits including seniority. Where further verification was required, fresh reports were directed. Appointment orders must be issued within two months of receiving the certified order.
Case Title: State of Karnataka & Anr. v. Sri Srinivasa B.N. & Anr. (and connected matters)
Case No.: W.P. No. 126 of 2025 C/W W.P. Nos. 5483 of 2025, 5701 of 2025 & Ors.
