HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday continued hearing multiple petitions alleging irregularities in the conduct and evaluation of the Group-1 Mains Examination held from October 21 to 27, 2024. Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, presiding over the single judge bench, heard the matter for over two hours before adjourning it to Thursday.
Petitioners, including K Parasharamulu of Shivanagar in Siddipet, sought a judicial inquiry into alleged discrepancies in exam centre allocation, hall ticket manipulation, and evaluation procedures. Senior advocates Surender and Vidyasagar represented the petitioners.
The petitioners claimed hall ticket numbers were altered between the preliminary and mains stages to influence centre allocation. “Hall ticket numbers are never changed irrespective of the exam centre. The changes raise serious doubts about the integrity of the process,” they argued.
They also pointed to an unusually high success rate at centres 16 to 19, with over 600 candidates seated close to one another reportedly scoring identical marks. Most selected female candidates were from centres 18 and 19, with the selection method not clearly explained.
Further allegations included the use of underqualified evaluators, mainly degree college lecturers, who were instructed to assess one paper every five minutes. Concerns were also raised about evaluators’ proficiency in Telugu, potentially disadvantaging candidates who wrote in the language.
The court directed the Telangana Public Service Commission (TGPSC) to submit complete details on the conduct and evaluation of the examination at the next hearing.
TGPSC’s challenge
The Telangana Public Service Commission (TGPSC) has filed an appeal before a division bench of the high court seeking to set aside the single judge’s interim order that halted the Group-1 recruitment process.
The matter was heard on Wednesday by Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Pal and Justice Renuka Yara. TGPSC argued that certificate verification had been completed, and halting the process at this stage would be unwarranted.
The Commission maintained that it had followed due procedure and that the freeze would disrupt the selection timeline, affecting administrative operations. The division bench heard initial arguments on the maintainability of the appeal and the validity of the April 17 interim order. The matter was adjourned for further hearing.