Telangana High Court dismisses batch of writ petitions – Telangana Today

It says there has been a delay in filing the applications and the petitioners have not provided an adequate explanation for the delay

Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court on Thursday dismissed a batch of writ petitions seeking reinstatement of notification no. 4/2022 dated April 26, 2022 and retrial of Group 1. The petitioners alleged that the Telangana State Public Service Commission (TGPSC) illegally canceled the previous notification and issued a fresh notification (No. 2/2024) on February 19, 2024, which changed the terms of the recruitment process.

While dismissing the petitions, the court granted some relief to the petitioners by granting them liberty to file a separate action on subsequent events subsequent to the issuance of the fresh notice. However, the tribunal clarified that these new issues could not be resolved under the present batch of writ petitions. The court noted that there was a significant delay in filing the petitions and noted that the petitioners did not provide an adequate explanation for the delay, which was a key factor in dismissing the case. The tribunal observed that the principles of justice could not be compromised because of the delay in approaching the court, particularly in the matter of recruitment.

Dr. Aditya Sondhi, senior counsel representing the petitioner Sri Palle Srinivas Reddy, submitted that as per an earlier judgment, the only viable option left for the TGPSC was to “re-conduct” the preliminary examination of Group 1 based on the April 2022 notification. He submitted that the cancellation of the notification and issuance of a fresh one is illegal as it has not only increased the number of vacancies from 503 to 563 but has altered and the mid-course selection process, which he claimed was a breach of fairness in the recruitment process.

Sondhi further alleged that the TSPC violated the prescribed ratio of 1:50 for vacancies and did not apply category-wise ratio, which could unfairly advantage some candidates. He questioned the validity of the new rules introduced through GO Ms No.29, dated February 8, 2024, suggesting that the introduction of such executive orders created confusion and could infringe on the rights of candidates. E Madan Mohan, another senior counsel representing another petitioner, added that the adjustments in the calculation of the vacancy, which were made under the new rules, were against the earlier guidelines and violated the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in various judgments, including the Indra case Sawhney, who advocated the concept of equitable and merit-based reservation.

The government, represented by the Telangana State Public Service Commission (TGPSC), opposed the writ petitions, arguing that they were filed too late and no good reason was provided to justify the delay. The tribunal accepted this reasoning, stating that the petitioners had not explained the delay in approaching the court even though they were aware of the new notice issued in February 2024. The tribunal referred to an earlier order where the court had already rejected similar grounds based on a six-month delay. In another key aspect of the judgment, the tribunal also noted that several petitioners sought to challenge the extension of the application deadline, which allowed candidates who did not apply within the original deadline to submit their applications until March 14, 2024. argued that this extension unfairly expanded the pool of applicants, disadvantaging those who applied within the deadline. However, the court rejected this argument, noting that the delay in filing the claims made these matters irrelevant to adjudication in this round of litigation.

Ultimately, the court held that after the earlier petitions were dismissed, there was no reason to “turn back the clock” and reinstate the earlier notice. The court concluded that the applications submitted in this batch should also be rejected, since the delay in submission made the merits of the case irrelevant for examination.

Dismiss the SC, ST Atrocities case
The Telangana High Court has quashed a SC, ST atrocities case filed against three judicial officers, saying the complaint was filed maliciously with an ulterior motive. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao, ruled that the High Court has the authority to quash criminal proceedings when they are found to have been initiated out of personal vendetta or private grudge.

The case involved an FIR filed by a lady judicial officer in 2015 accusing three of her colleagues Asifa Sultana and two others of abusing her on the basis of caste. The complaint was related to an incident during a training session at the Judicial Academy in Secunderabad where the complainant found one of her male colleagues in her quarters at midnight. Authorities later removed the male officer after an investigation, but the complainant filed a separate case against the three officers, alleging caste-based abuse. The High Court, on hearing the case, concluded that the complaint was a “malicious backlash” and an abuse of legal process. As a result, the court quashed the FIR, stressing that the criminal process should not be misused for personal reasons.

Book orders
Telangana High Court Justice K Sujana on Thursday reserved for orders the bail plea filed by suspended Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) N Bhujanga Rao, the third accused in the pending wiretapping case. It may be recalled that Justice K Sujana had earlier granted interim extension of bail on medical grounds including heart and kidney ailments.