Guwahati: A recent order by the Gauhati High Court, staying the suspension of 18 Assam government officers, including ACS, APS, and allied services, has brought to light the state government’s handling of allegations of unfair practices in the APSC recruitment process.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The court’s order exposed the procedural lapses by the Assam government in its attempt to address the “cash-for-jobs” scam that had plagued the APSC.
On February 7, 2025, the Gauhati High Court stayed the suspension of 18 ACS, APS, and allied service officers. These officers were among 34 identified by the Justice (retd) Biplab Kumar Sharma Commission of Enquiry as having secured their positions through fraudulent means.
The 18 officers appealed their suspensions at Gauhati High Court, citing legal errors on the part of the state government. The officers reinstated include Nandini Kakati, Analjyoti Das, Nilanjal Gogoi, Akashee Duwara, Rumi Timugpi, Dhiraj Kumar Jain, Kalyan Kumar Das, Faruk Ahmed, Hitesh Mazumdar, Chakradhar Deka, Kula Pradip Bhattacharyya, Deepankar Dutta Lahkar, Sourav Pran Sharma, Nitumoni Das, Bikash Sharma, Mridul Hazarika, Dhrubajyoti Hazarika, and Pushkal Gogoi.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The High Court’s stay order hinged on two key points. First, the Justice Sharma Commission’s report, while the basis for the suspensions, had not yet been tabled before the Assam Assembly, as required by Section 3(4) of the Commission of Enquiry Act, 1952.
The court emphasized that using such a report, before it is presented to the Assembly, to issue show cause notices and suspensions is not legally sustainable. The Act mandates that the State Government present the report along with a memorandum of action taken within six months of receiving it.
Second, the court noted that the officers were not provided with a copy of the very report that formed the basis of the disciplinary proceedings against them. The court highlighted that the principles of natural justice demand that individuals facing disciplinary action have access to all relevant documents.
The court observed that the report, which was the sole document relied upon by the employer, had not been furnished to the suspended officers.
The Justice (retired) Biplab Kumar Sharma inquiry commission was established by the Assam government to investigate alleged irregularities and malpractices in the 2013 and 2014 APSC Civil Service Examinations.
The commission’s report identified 34 officers as being involved in wrongdoing. However, the Assam government’s subsequent actions have been criticized for their inconsistency. While the report named 34 individuals, the government only suspended 21 officers in December 2023 and May 2024, leaving at least 13 others untouched.
This selective approach has raised serious questions about the government’s commitment to fully addressing the issue. Among those named in the Sharma Commission report but not initially suspended were APS officers Nabanita Sarma, Amit Raj Chodhury, Asheema Kalita, and Rituraj Doley, along with ACS officers Tridib Roy, Bikramdity Bora, Nandita Hazarika, and Jagadish Brahma.
The commission’s inquiry exposed widespread fraud in the recruitment process, yet the government’s response has been perceived as inadequate. Despite the report, the government initially delayed taking action, and when it finally did, it targeted only a fraction of the implicated officers. These officers, after successfully challenging their suspensions, have now returned to their positions, seemingly benefiting from the government’s procedural missteps.
Adding another layer to the complexity of the case, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed on September 30, 2023, following a Gauhati High Court directive. The SIT was tasked with investigating irregularities in the 2013 and 2014 combined competitive examinations conducted by the APSC. This directive came after the Justice Sharma Commission submitted its reports on the two exams.
The fact that the Sharma Commission’s report, which named 34 officers, was not tabled in the Assembly has further fueled concerns about transparency and accountability.
Despite the High Court’s involvement and the formation of the SIT, allegations of reluctance within the government to pursue the case vigorously have persisted.
Concerns were also raised about the initial handling of the SIT investigation, with accusations of attempts to categorize crimes in a way that would protect certain implicated officers. There have even been allegations that some accused officers were not charged for unknown reasons, requiring intervention from the Special Judge’s Court.
The High Court’s recent stay order and the ongoing investigations suggest that the APSC “cash-for-jobs” scam and its ramifications are far from resolved, and that the state government’s handling of the matter remains under intense scrutiny.