Tribunal seeks report on ‘irregularities’ in recruitment of sub-inspectors

The Karnataka Administrative Tribunal has sought a detailed report from the home department regarding the selection of six sub-inspectors of police, after it received a petition alleging irregularities in recruitment.

The sub-inspectors, Sreedhar BT, Sainath, Raghu Kumar V, Lakshman Prasad H, Vanita G, and Tippe Rudra, were recruited in 1998. Allegedly the then personnel secretary of a senior state police officer was behind the irregularity.

According to the petition, the six persons had appeared for a written exam for the post of sub-inspectors, though they were not eligible since their age did not fall under the norm. The candidates should be aged between 23 and 28, and born between March 28, 1970 and March 28, 1975. But Sreedhar was born on July 20, 1975, while Sainath’s date of birth was March 26, 1970.

Such discrepancies were found in the case of others also, the petitioner pointed out. Raghu Kumar was born on April 15, 1975; Lakshman Prasad on March 31, 1975, and Vanita on February 12, 1970.

Tippe Rudra’s age was not immediately known. However, it has been found that his name figured in the selection list dated August 26, 2003, and again on another list published on July 21, 2005.

He took charge after the second list was published.

The officers, who were allegedly appointed in violation of norms, said they had not forged any documents or furnished fake dates of birth. They maintained that if the department had found them ineligible, it should not have recruited them. They said they should not be terminated from service for no mistake of theirs. “We have not done any fraud. We produced the original documents. They cannot remove us from service. We are now too old to find employment elsewhere,” one of those selected said.

The officer, now an inspector, added that the selection committee had thoroughly checked the documents before appointing them. However, a discontent has been brewing against these cops, as many feel they should be dismissed.

Sub-inspectors were recruited by a panel headed by the director-general of police. The panel also comprised the additional director-general of police (administration) or inspector-general of police (administration), deputy inspector-general of police, a psychologist, director-general of social welfare, or his nominee not below the rank of joint director and director of backward classes or his nominee, with the deputy inspector general of police (headquarters) as member secretary.