The Supreme Court of India has declined to grant relief to Sanjiv Chaturvedi, a whistleblower Indian Forest Service officer, who sought a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into allegations of discrimination and irregularities in the selection process for a post on the Staff Selection Commission (SSC).
Chaturvedi claimed that his application was overlooked without reasonable cause, and he accused the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) of forging and fabricating records to cover up the issue.
A division bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra heard Chaturvedi’s appeal against the Uttarakhand High Court’s decision to reject his request for a CBI investigation. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde argued before the apex court, urging them to set aside the high court’s order and stating that the case involved criminality in the face of the law. However, the bench expressed reluctance to interfere with the ruling and suggested that the matter could be considered by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT).
The Supreme Court disposed of the petition, affirming the high court’s decision not to direct a CBI probe, but clarified that Chaturvedi could pursue appropriate proceedings before an appropriate forum to address his grievances. The court emphasized that the CAT should examine the matter on its own merits and make a suitable decision. The court acknowledged the allegations of forgery and fabrication of records but stated that it would be up to Chaturvedi to take necessary steps before the appropriate court if he believed such offenses occurred.
In the case
Sanjiv Chaturvedi, an Indian Forest Service officer, alleged discrimination in the selection process for the Staff Selection Commission. He claimed that despite submitting his application within the deadline and meeting the qualifications, he was not considered for the selection process, while other candidates who did not meet the eligibility criteria were allowed to participate. Chaturvedi accused the DoPT of forging and fabricating records to justify overlooking his application.
The matter was taken to the Uttarakhand High Court, which transferred the petition to the Central Administrative Tribunal for consideration. The high court refused to order a CBI investigation into the allegations of forgery and fabrication but directed the CAT to decide on the other relief sought by Chaturvedi.
