TGPSC defends Group-1 exam process in High Court amid bias allegations
Senior Counsel S. Niranjan Reddy, appearing for the TGPSC, strongly defended the recruitment process and sought to dispel apprehensions raised by the petitioners regarding discrepancies in evaluation and candidate selection. He submitted that the allegations made were based on misconceptions and lacked a factual basis.
By Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao of the Telangana High Court on Friday continued the hearing in a batch of writ petitions filed by unsuccessful candidates challenging the recruitment process for Group-1 services conducted by the Telangana State Public Service Commission (TGPSC). The Court had earlier stayed the issuance of appointment letters pending adjudication of the matter.
During the hearing, Senior Counsel S. Niranjan Reddy, appearing for the TGPSC, strongly defended the recruitment process and sought to dispel apprehensions raised by the petitioners regarding discrepancies in evaluation and candidate selection. He submitted that the allegations made were based on misconceptions and lacked a factual basis.
Responding to the allegation that certain examination centres, particularly two in Koti, had shown disproportionately high selection rates, he clarified that these centres were exclusively reserved for women and were selected based on the availability of facilities.
Around 1,500 candidates appeared from the Koti centres, and the selections made were proportionate to the number of candidates who wrote the exam from those centres, he explained.
The counsel also addressed the concern of medium-wise selection disparity. He informed the Court that among the selected candidates, 89.88% were from English medium, 9.95% from Telugu medium, and only 0.1% from Urdu medium.
He contended that these figures reflected broader trends observed in other public examinations, including those conducted by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC), and denied any discrimination based on the medium of instruction.
Niranjan Reddy further argued that evaluation was carried out using standardised key answers vetted by expert panels and that all biometric and nominal roll records had been disclosed to ensure procedural transparency.
The hearing on behalf of the TGPSC concluded on Friday. The Court adjourned the matter to Monday for the completion of arguments on behalf of the petitioners.
