Telangana HC pulls up education dept over rejection of DSC-2002 candidate’s plea

The Telangana High Court expressed dissatisfaction over the School Education Department's handling of representations submitted by DSC-2002 candidates seeking appointment as Hindi Pandit Grade-II teachers. Observing that the rejection appeared mechanical and contrary to the spirit of its earlier orders, the court sought further records from the authorities and adjourned the matter for further hearing.

By Our Legal Correspondent

Hyderabad: A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday heard a contempt case concerning the non-implementation of earlier directions relating to the appointment of DSC-2002 candidates. Principal Secretary to the School Education Department, Dr. Yogita Rana, appeared virtually before the Bench during the hearing.

---

The Bench expressed dissatisfaction over the manner in which the School Education Department had rejected the representation of a DSC-2002 candidate, observing that the decision appeared to have been taken mechanically with a predetermined mind not to grant the relief sought.

The matter relates to directions issued by the High Court on July 13, 2022, in a batch of writ petitions concerning the appointment of candidates to Hindi Pandit Grade-II posts under the DSC-2002 recruitment.

The court had directed the candidates to submit fresh representations to the respective District Educational Officers, who were required to examine their eligibility and forward recommendations to the State Government for consideration and appropriate orders. Following non-compliance with these directions, several candidates approached the High Court through contempt petitions. On December 20, 2024, the High Court closed six contempt cases after the Government Pleader informed the court that proposals concerning the candidates had been forwarded to the State Government.

The court directed the Government to consider the proposals and pass appropriate orders within four weeks, granting liberty to the petitioners to revive the contempt proceedings in the event of non-compliance. However, after examining the order, the Bench observed that it did not reflect the spirit in which the original writ petitions had been disposed of in July 2022.

The judges remarked that the authorities appeared to have rejected the representation mechanically, with a predetermined mind not to grant relief, without considering the contentions recorded in the earlier judgment, including the submissions made by the State’s counsel before the Division Bench.

The Special Government Pleader sought further time to place before the court the recommendations made by the District Educational Officer, particularly those contained in a letter dated July 22, 2008, which had been referred to in the original judgment.

Granting the request, the Bench adjourned the matter to November 23, 2026, and directed Dr. Yogita Rana, who attended the proceedings virtually, to remain present on the next date of hearing as well.