Telangana HC Sets Aside TGPSC Group-II Selection List

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court set aside the Telangana Public Service Commission’s (TGPSC) final selection list issued on October 24, 2019, for 1,032 Group-II Services posts, after finding fault with the re-evaluation of answer sheets. Against the advise of a technical committee and an order of a division bench of the High Court, the commission had evaluated answer sheets that candidates had tampered with in the 150-mark Part-B by scratching, erasing, or using whiteners,.

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the High Court directed the TGPSC to re-evaluate the papers and finalise the selection strictly in accordance with the recommendations of the technical committee dated March 3, 2017. Following this, the court said, the TGPSC would have to issue appointment orders to eligible candidates within eight weeks.

The TGPSC issued Notification No. 20/2015 dated 30.12.2015 and Supplementary Notification No. 17/2016 dated 01.09.2016, inviting applications for 1,032 posts in 13 categories under Group-II services. The written examination were conducted on November 11 and 13, 2016, which comprised four papers, each carrying 150 marks, and was followed by an interview carrying 75 marks, bringing the total to 675. Selection was to be made on the combined performance of candidates in the written examination and interview.

Sujatha and 14 others approached the High Court in 2019 complaining that TGPSC under the guise of implementing a division bench judgment dated 03.06.2019, had acted contrary to the true intent and spirit of the judgment by evaluating answer sheets of candidates who had admittedly tampered or used whiteners and erasers in Part-B of the OMR answer sheets, thereby vitiating the selection process and causing grave prejudice to meritorious candidates like them.

The instructions printed on OMR sheet as well as in the notification explicitly warned candidates against using whiteners, erasers, blades or to make any kind of overwriting or tampering, and that any such act would result in automatic disqualification.

A technical committee constituted by the commission, comprising experts from various fields, had also recommended that the commission must strictly not evaluate OMR answer sheets where candidates had tampered with answer sheets in Part-B, a portion containing answers to 150 questions, by scratching, erasing, or using whiteners. The committee said that such acts destroyed the integrity of the answer sheet and rendered it unworthy of reliable evaluation. When the matter went to the High Court, a division bench made it clear that the TGPSC must proceed strictly in accordance with the technical committee recommendations.

Senior counsel L. Ravichander argued that, contrary to the division bench directions, the TGPSC evaluated the tampered answer sheets and included them in the final selection list published on 24.10.2019. It was alleged that TGPSC had taken this decision to favour certain candidates and it had not disclosed the criteria or methodology adopted for such re-evaluation,

Allowing a batch of writ petitions, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka held that the commission had violated binding directions of a division bench and ignored the recommendations of a technical committee that had expressly barred evaluation of OMR sheets tampered within Part-B.

Justice Bheemapaka observed that extending re-evaluation to all four papers — when discrepancies were reported only in Paper-I — was arbitrary and beyond the commission’s authority. Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in ‘Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan High Court’, the judge reiterated that “rules of the game cannot be changed mid-way,” and that public recruitment must adhere to fairness and transparency under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

Declaring the inclusion of tampered answer sheets illegal and unconstitutional, the court directed TSPSC to undertake fresh evaluation strictly as per the division bench’s directions and the technical committee’s recommendations, and to complete the process within eight weeks. It also instructed the commission to ensure stricter transparency measures in future recruitments.