Centre discharges Puja Khedkar from IAS with immediate effect

File pic

The Centre on Saturday discharged Puja Khedkar from the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) with immediate effect.

This action comes weeks after the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) cancelled the IAS probationer's provisional candidature.

Puja Khedkar was discharged under Rule 12 of the IAS (Probation) Rules, 1954, which allows for the removal of a probationer found ineligible for recruitment.

Rule 12 of the IAS (Probation) Rules, 1954, provides for the discharge of a probationer on the grounds of being found ineligible to be recruited to the service.

According to sources, Puja Khedkar was found to have taken more attempts at the Civil Services Examination than allowed for her claimed other backward classes (OBC) and persons with disabilities (PwD) categories, and had exhausted that limit prior to 2022, the year of her selection, news agency ANI reported.

On July 31, UPSC, through a press statement, declared that it had decided to cancel the provisional candidature of Puja Khedkar, who was facing accusations of cheating and forgery. The commission found her guilty of violating rules and debarred her from all future examinations and selections.

UPSC stated that it had carefully considered the request of Puja Khedkar and, in order to meet the ends of justice, she was granted time until 3.30 pm on July 30 to submit her response to the show cause notice.

In August, former probationary IAS officer Puja Khedkar moved the Delhi High Court challenging UPSC's decision to cancel her candidature.

The Delhi Police, through a fresh status report filed, informed the high court that suspended trainee IAS officer, Puja Khedkar, had submitted two disability certificates, with suspicions that one of them might be forged.

In her recent reply to the Delhi High Court, Puja Khedkar, who faces accusations of cheating and improperly securing OBC and disability quota benefits, argued that UPSC does not have the authority to disqualify her. The court instructed the investigation agency not to arrest her while the matter was under consideration, noting that her immediate arrest is not deemed necessary.

UPSC argued that Khedkar is a "mastermind" and that her actions would not have been possible without assistance from others, supporting their position that custodial interrogation is necessary.

(With ANI inputs)