Not Declaring A Government Job Was Not An Innocent Slip, Court Holds
A police sub-inspector cleared the State's gazetted officers' examination without disclosing she was already a government servant. The High Court has upheld the cancellation of her candidature.
The Court held that had she disclosed her status, she would not have been allotted the examination centre she got, which goes to the integrity of the examination. She was no novice and held a no-objection certificate, yet deliberately withheld the fact in both applications. The explanation of inadvertence was unacceptable. The Tribunal's order was set aside and the cancellation restored.
- What the form asks, the candidate must answer. The employer judges relevance, not the applicant.
- The centre allotment was the harm — non-disclosure changed where she sat the exam.
- Disclosing late does not cure it. She revealed it only at document verification.
- The Tribunal's online-form excuse failed against two separate applications with the same omission.
- Court
- High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru
- Bench
- Justice D K SINGH, Justice H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN
- Citation
- W.P. No. 57896 of 2017
- Case
- W.P. No. 57896 of 2017
- Decided
- 7 September 2026
- Outcome
- Writ petition allowed; tribunal's order set aside and cancellation of candidature restored
What happened
The respondent had been a police sub-inspector since 2007. When the Public Service Commission advertised 440 gazetted probationer posts in 2015, she applied online for the preliminary examination without disclosing that she was a government servant, and did the same for the main examination.
She passed both. Only at document verification in May 2016 did she disclose her status and produce a no-objection certificate from her department. The Commission cancelled her candidature in June 2016.
A year later she went to the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, which allowed her application in 2017, treating the omission as an inadvertent mistake that the online form gave no chance to correct.
Why the High Court disagreed
Had she disclosed that she was a government servant, she would not have been allotted the centre where she took her preliminary and main examinations. What is important is the integrity of the examination.
If a candidate, with an oblique motive, does not disclose being a government servant and is allotted a centre where they have worked, that casts doubt on the integrity of the process. She was not naive about the consequence: she had served since 2007 and had already obtained a no-objection certificate.
Relying on Supreme Court authority, the Court held that the employer is the judge of the relevance of information it seeks, and that an explanation of inadvertence offered only after the suppression is discovered is unacceptable.
The result
The amicus curiae appointed by the Court supported the Tribunal's order, the respondent herself not having appeared.
The Court nonetheless found substance in the Commission's case, allowed its writ petition, and set aside the Tribunal's order of July 2017.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Can my selection be cancelled for not declaring I am a government servant?
Yes. The Court upheld the cancellation, finding the omission deliberate and affecting the integrity of the examination.
Does disclosing it at document verification cure the omission?
No. The disclosure came only after she had passed both stages.
Filling a recruitment application while in service
- Declare existing government employment in every application, even if you think it irrelevant.
- Get the no-objection certificate before applying and mention it.
- If you spot an error, write to the commission at once — do not wait for verification.
- Challenge a cancellation promptly; delay weakens an inadvertence plea.
Source. High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, W.P. No. 57896 of 2017, decided 7 September 2026 by Justice D K SINGH, Justice H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in