MPSC Denies Allegations in Marks Leak Case Involving Police Inspector
The Maharashtra Public Service Commission refutes claims linking its officials to a marks leak investigation involving a former crime branch inspector.
MPSC clarifies that allegations against its joint secretary are false.
Former inspector Rahul Shire faces departmental inquiry for his report on the marks leak.
Investigation reveals the actual culprits may be from the state excise department.
In a significant development, the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) has publicly denied accusations implicating its joint secretary in the alleged leak of marks from the state excise sub-inspector examination. This clarification comes in response to a departmental inquiry involving Rahul Shire, a former crime branch inspector now assigned to the traffic department, initiated on January 3.
The controversy began when an aspirant, Ravindra Ingole, along with other candidates, approached the deputy commissioner of police in Nagpur, alleging that confidential documents related to the MPSC exam marks had been compromised. The complaint was subsequently passed to Inspector Shire, who conducted an inquiry and submitted his findings on April 3. In his report, Shire claimed to have consulted Inspector Anil Patil from the Navi Mumbai crime branch, who allegedly identified the MPSC joint secretary and others as responsible for the leak.
However, further investigation revealed discrepancies in Shire's report. The Nagpur police commissioner, after reviewing audio recordings of the conversation between Shire and Patil, noted that the recordings did not mention the MPSC joint secretary. Instead, Patil had referred to the joint commissioner and other officials from the state excise department. Following this revelation, the police commissioner formally notified MPSC on September 7, clarifying that Shire had incorrectly implicated the joint secretary.
In light of these findings, R P Otari, the deputy secretary for policy and amendments at MPSC, issued a public statement from Navi Mumbai, asserting that any reports blaming MPSC officials were unfounded. Senior police officials have indicated that disciplinary proceedings against Shire are underway to investigate the inaccuracies in his report and determine if they constitute misconduct. The original complaint regarding the marks leak remains active and has not been dismissed.
As the investigation progresses, attention has shifted back to the excise department officials mentioned in the recorded conversation. A senior official involved in the inquiry remarked that MPSC's clarification has redirected the focus of the investigation, emphasizing the need to understand how the misinformation was incorporated into Shire's report and the implications for all parties involved.
