The National Commission for Scheduled Castes has directed MNLU Nagpur to respond to allegations of recruitment irregularities and reservation policy failures. The university must provide a formal explanation within 15 days following a complaint from a candidate regarding hiring practices for non-teaching staff.
The National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has officially initiated an inquiry into the recruitment practices at the Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU), Nagpur. The move follows a formal complaint alleging systemic irregularities and non-compliance with mandatory reservation policies for Scheduled Caste candidates.
Nature of the Allegations
The complaint, filed by an applicant named Nitesh Ramkrishna Gadkari, centers on the university's 2022-23 recruitment drive for non-teaching positions. According to the complaint, the applicant applied for the roles of Caretaker-cum-Office Assistant and Office Attendant. Despite completing the interview process in December 2023, he was not selected. The grievance specifically points to the hiring of candidates who were already employed by the institution, effectively filling two out of three available positions internally. Furthermore, the complaint alleges that the university has consistently failed to follow reservation roster requirements in its hiring processes dating back to the 2018-19 period.
Regulatory and Procedural Background
This development marks a significant escalation in a dispute that has persisted for several months. The complainant previously sought intervention from the Chief Justice of India in July 2025, which led the Supreme Court Secretariat to forward the matter to the university's registrar in October 2025. According to the details provided in the complaint, subsequent Right to Information (RTI) requests filed by the candidate did not lead to a resolution or a detailed disclosure of the university's internal recruitment deliberations.
Regulatory Implications for MNLU
The NCSC has exercised its constitutional authority under Article 338 of the Constitution to issue this notice. The university is required to submit a comprehensive response within a 15-day window. Under the commission’s mandate, it possesses powers similar to a civil court, which allows it to compel the attendance of institution representatives if the initial response is deemed insufficient or is not submitted on time. The complainant has requested an independent inquiry into all recruitment records, selection merit lists, and reservation rosters maintained by the university since the 2018-19 academic cycle. For the institution, the outcome of this inquiry will be important as it relates to administrative governance and adherence to constitutional reservation mandates in state-affiliated educational bodies. The next critical stage will be the university's formal submission to the commission and whether that response addresses the specific grievances regarding historical roster compliance.