HYDERABAD: When the Telangana Public Service Commission (TGPSC) issued a notification in February 2024 for the recruitment of 563 Group-I officers — after rescinding the previous one — it was supposed to be a landmark moment for the state.
For thousands of aspirants across the state, it was more than just a job notification — it was the culmination of a decade-long wait. But that wait continues as does the frustration and the growing sense of betrayal.
In the years leading up to Telangana’s formation in 2014, youth played a central role in the statehood movement. One of the key rallying points was the underrepresentation of Telangana people in state-level services. There was hope that with the formation of a new state, the aspirations of local youth would finally be fulfilled.
Instead, 10 years on, not a single successful Group-I recruitment cycle has been completed.
A candidate who appeared for the latest Group-I Mains exam said the irony is hard to ignore. “We already spent a significant portion of our 20s facing uncertainty because of the statehood movement,” she said. “That’s when people are most idealistic. Telangana should’ve caught us young, trained us, and turned us into upright officers who could serve the state. Instead, we’ve been dragged into a cycle of financial stress, mental agony and administrative apathy.”
Another aspirant, Kumar (name changed), who also appeared for the recent Mains, gave vent to his frustration: “I didn’t appear for the UPSC Civil Services exams because I dedicated myself completely to Group-I. I spent lakhs on coaching and sacrificed time with my family, friends and personal life. But the delays, legal battles and uncertainty are wearing us down.”
Both these candidates, like thousands of others, spent the prime of their lives hoping to become part of the bureaucratic system that now seems indifferent to their plight, though the success rate is only 0.23%. For them, skipping movies, cricket matches, and social gatherings was not a sacrifice, but an investment in realising their dream.
Their frustration stems from the recruitment process being mired in fierce legal battles, exposing lapses that the Telangana High Court has described as undermining the very “sanctity of the examination”.
The history of these examinations, spanning decades, is marked by recurring irregularities, repeated cancellations and countless shattered aspirations.
A legacy of controversy
The history of Group-I recruitment in the Telugu states is fraught with setbacks. In undivided Andhra Pradesh, the last Group-I notification before bifurcation was issued in 2009. That exam, too, was marred by allegations of irregularities, leading to delays in finalising the results. When Telangana was formed in 2014, hopes were high that a fresh Public Service Commission would usher in reforms.
For years, however, the new body remained hesitant in issuing a Group-I notification. It was only in April 2022, after a 13-year gap, that Notification No.04/2022 was issued, for recruitment to 503 posts. An astounding 2.3 lakh candidates applied — a testament to both the demand for stable government jobs and the scarcity of opportunities.
But from the very outset, the process became contentious.
Paper leak & notification scrapped
The preliminary test held on October 16, 2022, was scrapped after a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing recruitment scams uncovered evidence of a question paper leak. While reviewing petitions, the high court noted that the Commission itself had admitted to lapses, necessitating the cancellation. A re-examination was conducted on June 11, 2023, but once again candidates alleged irregularities. Unlike the October test, where biometric attendance was mandatory, the June re-exam dispensed with biometric verification altogether. Hall tickets were issued without photographs, and OMR sheets carried no pre-printed details. Petitioners argued that these omissions compromised the fairness of the process.
Adding to the confusion were discrepancies in the reported number of candidates. A web note issued on June 28, 2023, stated that 2,33,506 candidates had appeared, while a counter affidavit filed on July 12, 2023, put the figure at 2,33,248. The high court observed that such inconsistencies betrayed a “casual approach” in handling a matter of immense importance.
On September 23, 2023, the court cancelled the June exam as well, marking a setback to the TGPSC’s integrity in holding a crucial exam in less than a year.
Despite the setbacks, the Commission pressed forward. On February 19, 2024, it issued another notification for 563 Group-I vacancies. The Prelims were conducted on June 9, 2024, followed by Mains between October 21 and October 27, 2024. Initially, the process appeared smooth. Prelims results were declared. But once again, irregularities surfaced — this time in the evaluation of the Mains examination answer scripts.
Lapses in recruitment process
The high court’s scrutiny of the 2024–25 examinations has revealed serious procedural lapses in the conduct of the recruitment process. One of the key concerns was the issuance of two sets of hall tickets for both the Preliminary and Main examinations, each carrying different numbers.
The court noted that this practice was not supported by the official notification or the Commission’s rules. The process of randomisation also came under question. Certain examination centres — Nos 18 and 19 — were allotted exclusively to women, while Centre No 27 was reserved entirely for men.
The court held that this form of gender-based segregation violated Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. Discrepancies were further noted in the number of candidates. The Commission initially stated that 21,075 candidates appeared for the Mains, excluding 18 sportspersons. However, the marks list published on March 30, 2025, recorded 21,085 candidates. No explanation was provided for this discrepancy.
Irregularities were also found in the evaluation process. Candidates who were disqualified in the General English paper still had their remaining six answer scripts assessed, and memoranda of marks were issued to them, which the court said was against the rules.
The evaluation itself raised serious concerns. Patterns emerged where candidates with consecutive hall ticket numbers received identical scores. For example, hall tickets 240902470 and 240902471 each recorded 253 marks. Similar anomalies were identified in the cases of 1,369 candidates, casting doubt on the credibility of the evaluation process.
The court also questioned the composition of the evaluation panel.
Despite a press note assuring that only regular faculty members would be engaged, retired professors and even private tutors from coaching institutes were involved in assessing answer scripts. The court observed this was a clear departure from the stated norms. The statistical outcomes of the examination highlighted another major concern.
Out of 12,381 English-medium aspirants, 506 were declared successful. In sharp contrast, only 56 of the 8,694 Telugu-medium candidates cleared the exam. Urdu-medium aspirants fared slightly better, with one in 10 qualifying. The court remarked that this stark disparity “amounts to injustice” against Telugu-medium candidates.
The human cost
According to the Periodic Labour Force Survey, the average urban youth unemployment rate stood at 16.45% between July 2023 and June 2024.
Even those employed in private, self or public sectors apply for recruitment exams conducted by the TGPSC, with many quitting their jobs to dedicate years to preparation. For lakhs of aspirants, Group-I is more than just an exam — it is a lifeline. They spend lakhs of rupees on coaching institutes, studying 10 to 12 hours a day.
Beyond procedural irregularities in the recruitment process lies an immense human toll. The repeated cancellations have left this generation of candidates in limbo. “We lost years we can never get back,” lamented Kumar. The high court, too, acknowledged this anguish, noting that “the unemployed youth of Telangana are the ultimate sufferers”.
Political overtones
The issue has also acquired political dimensions. Opposition parties have accused the government of shielding an incompetent Commission. Student unions, meanwhile, argue that repeated failures amount to systemic injustice against the youth.
However, the Group-I aspirants appeal that the political parties must understand the human cost of delays in recruitment exams and not make such exams their political battlegrounds. The history of political interference in the Groups’ notifications is hampering the recruitment process, said one of the candidates, an opinion also reflected in the TGPSC’s affidavit filed in the high court.
What lies ahead?
The Commission has indicated that it may approach a division bench challenging aspects of the high court’s findings. But for aspirants, that is cold comfort. With the process once again stalled, uncertainty reigns.
Experts argue that systemic reform is the only way forward. Stronger safeguards against paper leaks, transparent digital evaluation and strict adherence to rules are seen as minimum requirements. Some have suggested an independent body to monitor the functioning of the Commission.
Professor M Kodandaram, a key figure in the Telangana movement and founder of the Telangana Jana Samithi (TJS), offers a sobering perspective rooted in both social reality and systemic shortfalls. He recalled his visit to the TGPSC office, alongside renowned educationist Professor G Haragopal. “We gave our suggestions and recommendations in good faith,” he said. “The Commission must learn from its past mistakes and make sure they are never repeated.”
Their visit reflects growing concern among civil society thinkers about the credibility of a process that has become a flashpoint of job aspirants’ unrest.
“Even after the recent revamp, the TGPSC still lacks adequate staff,” he observed. “This administrative weakness is compounded by a faculty crunch in our universities. How can we expect a flawless recruitment process without strengthening our academic and institutional foundations first?”
He opined, like many Group-I aspirants, that there should be a high-power grievance redressal mechanism to address the issues locally.
What is TGPSC saying?
A senior official from the TGPSC, speaking on condition of anonymity, laid bare the Commission’s stance as it prepares to challenge the recent court verdict before a division bench.
“The court judgment is not final,” he said. “We will be approaching a division bench shortly. Contrary to how it is being portrayed, the judgment does not establish any pinpointed mistakes.”
To him, and to the Commission, legal setbacks are not proof of systemic collapse but evidence of a politically orchestrated attack. “This entire case,” he claimed, “is politically motivated. It’s being funded by vested interests who are playing with the lives of innocent job aspirants.”
According to him, the Commission is being unfairly singled out. Group-I recruitments, he argued, are the only ones trapped in a legal quagmire. “There’s no issue with any of our other recruitment notifications. Why only Group-I? That’s the question no one is asking.”
In a bold assertion, the official even argued that the TGPSC is “more transparent than the UPSC itself.”
“UPSC only publishes marks of candidates who reach the interview stage. We released marks of all candidates qualified for the Mains. That’s how transparent we are. But ironically, it is this very transparency that has become a matter of litigation.”
He drew sharp comparisons with other states: “Why is there no issue in Tamil Nadu or Kerala? Why do only the Telugu states face this kind of trouble every time? It’s because some people want to fish in troubled waters. It’s mala fide. It’s not just about the Commission — it’s about attacking constitutional institutions and discrediting state governments.”
On allegations of irregularities in evaluation — such as an evaluator being a faculty member at a coaching institute — the official brushed them aside. “That person was a faculty some 20 years ago. How can that be challenged now?” he asked. “If someone says a non-competitive candidate got selected, we are ready to submit the answer scripts to the court. Let the evidence speak.”
Yet, while emphatic about the Commission’s integrity, he was cautious on reforms. “Yes, we are bringing changes to improve processes further. But creating a high-level grievance redressal system isn’t practically possible. If you open that door, people will challenge every single mark at every stage. That’s not how recruitment works.”
“I can assure you of one thing,” the official concluded. “We are ready to submit any document, in confidence, to prove our integrity and credibility. We have nothing to hide.”
But outside the Commission’s walls, assurances no longer suffice. The deeper question remains: can fractured trust ever be restored by documents and denials alone?
A question that lingers
After repeated controversies, legal setbacks and the mounting psychological toll on aspirants, a deeper question now demands public reflection: Is Group-I still worth the cost?
The prestige of these posts has long created a single-track obsession among Telangana’s youth, where statehood itself was intertwined with dreams of representation in governance. But with years lost to flawed exams, opaque administration and endless litigation, some argue it is time to rethink the narrative.
Why must success be defined so narrowly? Why can’t bright, resilient aspirants pursue other respectable paths — teaching, entrepreneurship or self-employment — rather than placing all their hopes on a broken system?
April 2022 — The first Group-I notification was issued eight years after the formation of Telangana and 13 years after the last test conducted in undivided Andhra Pradesh in 2009
The preliminary exam held on October 16, 2022 was scrapped following question paper leak
A re-exam was conducted on June 11, 2023. However, on September 23, 2023, the high court cancelled the exam, citing inconsistencies
Undeterred by the setback, the Telangana Public Service Commission issued another notification in February 2024 for recruitment of 563 Group-I posts
Again, irregularities surfaced in the Mains exam conducted between October 21 and October 27, 2024 prompting the high court this month to scrap the result, ordering the TGPSC to re-evaluate the answer scripts. The court even threatened to cancel the exam if the Commission failed to comply
Aspirants Struggle
Despite repeated notifications, Group-I recruitment process has
failed to complete a successful cycle for over a decade
Candidates have invested years of preparation, lakhs of rupees, and personal time into Group-I exams, often quitting jobs
The recurring failures have sparked demands for better administrative accountability, grievance redressal mechanisms to ensure fair recruitment processes
Why people chase Group-I jobs
According to Prof Kodandaram, the obsession with Group-I is not just about employment — it’s about identity, dignity and mobility in a deeply stratified society. “There are two reasons why so many youth chase government jobs,” he explained. “One is job security. The other, and perhaps more powerful, is the elevation of self-respect.” He elaborated that in many communities, especially in rural Telangana, cracking the Group-I exam is not just a personal milestone — it’s a transformation of social status. “If a young man or woman becomes a Group-I officer, their entire family’s standing in the village or community changes. It brings respect. It brings a voice. It is a symbol of having arrived.”