By Neeraj Mishra
The average career span of an Indian public servant stretches across three decades. Most enter service in their mid-twenties and retire around the age of sixty. But for a batch of 147 officers recruited through the 2003 Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (CGPSC) examination, the story has unfolded under an unrelenting legal shadow for more than twenty years.
Their appointments were declared fraudulent by the Chhattisgarh High Court in 2017. Yet, the officers continue to occupy influential positions across the state administration. Many have risen through the ranks, and some have even been inducted into the IAS and IPS.
The High Court judgment, delivered by then Chief Justice Deepak Gupta, had directed the state government to suspend the entire batch. It also ordered the termination of one officer who had allegedly secured selection under the Scheduled Caste quota despite belonging to the general category.
However, the entire batch appealed before the Supreme Court, which stayed the High Court order. That stay, granted in 2017, remains in force nearly a decade later.
In the meantime, officers whose appointments remain under judicial scrutiny continue to wield administrative authority over millions of citizens. Some now serve as district magistrates in major districts, despite the unresolved legality of their very entry into public service.
The controversy deepens because the state government itself admitted before the High Court that serious irregularities had occurred in the “scaling” of marks during the recruitment process. According to Court records, the flawed scaling rendered the entire selection exercise suspect.
The state’s Anti-Corruption Bureau reportedly confirmed the allegations raised by petitioner Varsha Dongre, who argued that manipulated scaling enabled several candidates to secure appointments they otherwise would not have received.
One of the most cited examples was that of Rajeev Singh Chauhan, selected as a Treasury Officer under the Scheduled Caste quota despite allegedly belonging to the general category. Investigations also pointed to at least 17 other candidates who benefited from distorted scaling and altered rankings.
The issue strikes at the heart of reservation-based recruitment. In public examinations, eligibility is not determined merely by marks, but by the intersection of merit and reservation categories. If the original scaling is recalculated correctly, several officers who later rose to elite services may no longer qualify for the positions they hold today.
Among the most prominent names frequently discussed in connection with the controversy are Roktima Yadav and Padmini Bhoi, both of whom are now IAS officers. Yet, their foundational appointments remain dependent on a Supreme Court stay order that has not been substantively revisited since 2017.
Critics argue that the state government’s role has been equally troubling. Despite acknowledging faults in the selection process, the government neither implemented the High Court’s directions nor pursued an urgent resolution in the Supreme Court.
The implications of a final judicial verdict are enormous. If the Supreme Court ultimately upholds the High Court judgment, dozens of careers could collapse overnight, triggering a cascading administrative crisis across the state cadre.
But perhaps the most extraordinary development emerged recently, when the Supreme Court reportedly referred the matter for possible settlement through a Lok Adalat mechanism.
For petitioners like Varsha Dongre, the suggestion borders on the absurd.
Dongre claims she lost selection for the post of assistant director in the state publicity department because of manipulated scaling that allegedly favoured another candidate, Usha Kiran Barai. According to accounts surrounding the case, Dongre was later offered an alternative government position after the High Court verdict, but she refused, insisting instead on accountability, cancellation of fraudulent appointments, and justice for all affected candidates.
More than two decades after the disputed examination, Dongre has neither secured the job she believes was denied to her nor seen accountability fixed upon those allegedly responsible for the irregularities.
Instead, she now faces the prospect of “settling” a case that raises fundamental questions about merit, reservation, institutional integrity, and the credibility of public recruitment in India.
For the citizens of Chhattisgarh, the larger question remains unresolved: what does it mean for governance when the legitimacy of an entire administrative batch hangs indefinitely between a High Court verdict and a Supreme Court stay?
—The writer is a senior journalist
The post Twenty Years Under a Cloud: The PSC Recruitment Scam That Refuses to End appeared first on India Legal.