The Karnataka High Court has criticised the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) and State transport authorities for accepting certificates claiming that candidates had completed one year of training in repairing heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) and heavy passenger vehicles (HPVs) fitted with petrol engines. The court observed that such vehicles had not existed in India for decades and described the certificates issued by transport corporations as containing a “blatant lie”. It questioned why the authorities had accepted the documents without properly examining the claims made in them.

The court’s observations centred on certificates stating that certain candidates had received practical training in repairing petrol-powered heavy vehicles at the workshops of State transport corporations. The certificates reportedly referred to both HGVs, used to transport goods, and HPVs, designed to carry passengers. The court expressed concern that the stated training involved a type of heavy vehicle that, according to its observations, had not existed in India for decades.

The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) and the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) were among the organisations whose certificates came under scrutiny. The court said the statements contained in the documents regarding training on heavy vehicles fitted with petrol engines were a “blatant lie”. Its remarks raised questions about the accuracy of the information certified by the corporations and the checks carried out before such documents were issued.

Also Read: OpenAI Cites Sensitive Information Violations In Dismissal Of Three AI Researchers

The court also criticised the Transport Commissioner and the KPSC for accepting the certificates without adequate scrutiny. It questioned the reasonableness of relying on documents that referred to training on vehicles the court said were no longer in existence in India. The observations highlighted the responsibility of public authorities and recruiting bodies to verify the authenticity and technical accuracy of certificates submitted in connection with recruitment or eligibility requirements.

The case brings attention to the importance of ensuring that training certificates accurately reflect the practical experience and technical skills claimed by candidates. Documents issued by government departments and public sector organisations can play a significant role in establishing eligibility for employment or other official purposes. The court’s remarks indicate concern over whether the certificates in question were examined carefully enough before being accepted by the relevant authorities.

The available report does not provide further details about the candidates involved, the specific recruitment process, or any final directions issued by the court. It also does not establish whether disciplinary or other action has been ordered against the officials or organisations concerned. The court’s criticism, however, places the verification of training certificates and the accountability of the issuing and accepting authorities at the centre of the matter.

Also Read: India Tells US Skilled Worker Mobility Benefits Both Economies After New PERM Policy Move