Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court: Police Patil Appointments Cancelled Due to Interview Irregularities

Updated
Oct 23, 2025 6:55 PM
News Image

ASHISH S/O YASHWANT HARDE AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MAHA. THR. SECRETARY HOME MINISTRY, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI AND ORS.

The Case Begins

Ashish Harde and others were chosen as Police Patils after a written test and interviews. However, complaints about cheating in the interviews led to an investigation.

Complaints and Investigation

Those who didn't get selected claimed the interviews were unfair. The Collector of Bhandara ordered a check, which found the process was flawed. This led to the cancellation of the successful candidates' appointments.

"The selection process was not conducted in a fair manner," the investigation report stated.

Tribunal Decisions

The successful candidates challenged their firing at the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT). At first, the tribunal sided with them, but the High Court sent the decision back to the tribunal for another look.

Tribunal's Final Judgment

After reviewing, the tribunal agreed to cancel the appointments, pointing out that the interview committee was not set up properly and there were issues in the interview process.

Court's Ruling

The High Court, with Judges Anil S. Kilor and Rajnish R. Vyas in charge, rejected the appeals by the successful candidates. The court found the interview process was not trustworthy because of unauthorized decisions and inconsistent scoring methods.

"The integrity of the selection process is full of doubt," the judgment noted.

Key Issues

  • Improper Delegation: The interview committee wasn't set up according to the rules, with the wrong people taking part instead of the right officials.
  • Inconsistent Scoring: Scores were given inconsistently, with some members using stars instead of numbers.
  • Lack of Transparency: Candidates didn't know who the committee members were, making the process seem unfair.

Summary of Verdict

The court's decision emphasizes the need to follow proper procedures in hiring to ensure fairness and clarity. The temporary relief for the petitioners was extended for four weeks, giving them a short period of relief.

"No case is made out by the petitioners which require interference," concluded the judges.

This case underlines the importance of honesty in public job appointments, making sure all candidates are judged fairly.