The Supreme Court has struck down the Karnataka Civil Services (Validation of Selection and Appointment of 2011 Batch Gazetted Probationers) Act, 2022, holding it unconstitutional for attempting to revive a recruitment process previously cancelled over widespread corruption and nepotism. A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran directed the Karnataka Government to recruit for vacant Group A and Group B posts under the existing rules, granting eligible candidates a one-time age relaxation.
Background
The recruitment process began on November 3, 2011, for 362 Group A and Group B officer posts. More than 1.38 lakh candidates applied, and 1,090 candidates were called for interviews. In 2013, the Karnataka Government withheld the final selection list following complaints of irregularities and ordered an investigation by the State Criminal Investigation Department (CID).
The investigation revealed serious allegations of manipulation, corruption and favouritism involving officials of the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC). The government cancelled the recruitment in March 2014, and the Karnataka High Court upheld the decision. The Supreme Court subsequently refused to interfere with the cancellation.
Efforts to restart the recruitment from the written examination stage also failed. However, Karnataka enacted the 2022 legislation to validate the selection and appointments, citing the hardship faced by candidates who had not themselves been implicated in the investigation. The legislation was challenged before the courts, leading to the present appeals.
The Bench examined whether the legislature could enact a law effectively undoing judicial decisions that had upheld the cancellation. It held that the legislation could not stand because the recruitment had already been invalidated on grounds affecting the integrity of the entire selection process.
The Court made its position clear, stating,
"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 judges emphasised that a legislature may amend the law to remove the defect identified by a court, but cannot simply nullify a final judicial decision through subsequent legislation. The Bench also rejected the argument that candidates not individually found tainted should be permitted to retain their appointments, since those appointments depended on the unconstitutional Act of 2022.
Expressing concern over the manner in which the challenges had previously been handled, the Court observed that the impugned judgments had upheld legislation beyond the law-making authority's constitutional powers.
The Supreme Court declared the 2022 Act unconstitutional and set aside the impugned judgments. However, considering that more than a decade had passed since the original recruitment, the Bench declined to restart the entire selection process.
The Court directed the Karnataka Government to notify recruitment for the vacant Group A and Group B posts under the existing recruitment rules. Eligible candidates, including the six appellants, candidates awaiting proceedings before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal and previously appointed candidates who were not found tainted, must receive a one-time age relaxation to participate in the fresh selection process.
The Bench clarified the consequences of any fresh appointment, stating,
"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."
It further directed that candidates currently in service, if selected again, would have their earlier service counted towards pension and retirement benefits. Their seniority, however, would begin from the date of their fresh appointment.
The appeals were allowed, while the applications seeking impleadment and intervention were rejected.
Case Details
Case Title: Srinivasa T. & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Case Number: Civil Appeal Nos. of 2026 (@ SLP (C) Nos. 21195–21196 of 2023)
Judges: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Decision Date: October 29, 2026
