HP HC Questions Govt on 139 Unadvertised Police Posts
The Himachal Pradesh High Court seeks clarity from the state government and HPPSC over 139 unadvertised female police constable posts.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has stepped into a brewing controversy surrounding the recruitment of female police constables in the state. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has demanded urgent clarification from both the state government and the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (HPPSC) regarding a significant discrepancy over 139 unadvertised vacancies.
The legal battle erupted when it appeared that the government and the HPPSC held conflicting positions on whether these additional 139 posts could be filled through the current selection process. The court noted a prima facie discrepancy in their stances during the hearing of the case Priyanka Sharma vs State of Himachal Pradesh, along with three related petitions.
The Recruitment Breakdown
The controversy traces back to a recruitment drive initiated on October 4, 2024. The original advertisement specifically called for applications for 380 female police constable positions. Following a rigorous process involving physical tests and a written examination conducted by the HPPSC, a selection list comprising approximately 800 candidates was prepared.
However, the situation took a controversial turn when 139 unadvertised posts were introduced into the mix. This move, along with alleged procedural errors regarding the reservation roster, has led to accusations of lack of transparency and violation of recruitment protocols.
Allegations of Merit Manipulation
At the heart of the petition is 25-year-old Priyanka Sharma from Shimla. Sharma, who secured 63.50 marks under the EWS category, alleges that she was unfairly bypassed in the selection process. According to the legal challenge, the recruitment process followed a highly irregular pattern:
- Delayed Verification: Sharma claims she was scheduled for document verification on July 3, 2026, but the process was postponed without any official explanation.
- Reversed Merit Lists: The petitioner alleges that candidates with lower scores—ranging between 62.50 and 63.25—were called for medical examinations and dope tests via district-level communications.
- Exclusion of High Scorers: Despite having higher marks, candidates like Sharma were allegedly excluded from the subsequent stages of the recruitment.
The petitioners argue that these actions violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, asserting that filling unadvertised posts and revising merit lists without clear, transparent rules undermines fundamental rights and recruitment integrity.
Court Demands Fresh Instructions
Taking serious note of the conflicting arguments presented by the state and the commission, the High Court has directed the counsel for both parties to obtain fresh instructions. The court is seeking to understand exactly why the two bodies are at odds regarding these extra vacancies.
The matter is now scheduled for a critical hearing on October 13, 2026. During this session, both the state government and the HPPSC are expected to clarify their respective positions and, crucially, produce the category-wise merit records to resolve the allegations of irregularity.