TSPSC told to consider ‘rejected’ candidates’ case
Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court, comprising Justice A Rajasekhar Reddy and Justice T Vinod Kumar, declared that rules cannot be changed in the middle of the selection process or thereafter. The panel faulted the Telangana State Public Services Commission and said it ought not to have or could not have accepted […]
Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court, comprising Justice A Rajasekhar Reddy and Justice T Vinod Kumar, declared that rules cannot be changed in the middle of the selection process or thereafter. The panel faulted the Telangana State Public Services Commission and said it ought not to have or could not have accepted new/additional documents from the rejected candidates thereby making the condition of “no additions/change being permitted” irrelevant. The panel directed the Public Service Commission to consider the cases of 39 persons for the post of principals and various Gurukuls run by the State government. The court directed that the commission shall consider only the documents uploaded by each of these 39 candidates along with the application submitted through the online process, if not considered earlier, on its merit and pass individual speaking order and communicate the same to the candidate.
A writ appeal was filed by V Vishnu against the order of a single judge with regard to the procedure followed by the commission in the appointment of principals in various Gurukuls and residential schools run by the Telangana government. The preconditions included that all documents must be uploaded along with the application through the online registration process and that shall be final, However, the application of some of the candidates was rejected as not being in compliance with the conditions specified in the notification; the documents submitted, on verification were found be fabricated. Thus, applications of 914 candidates were rejected. The single judge faulted summary rejection by the TSPSC and directed the rejected candidates to submit individual representation by enclosing the experience certificates to the Commission.
On a detailed consideration of the pleadings, the panel found that petitioners therein had filed all the requisite documents along with the applications, which the TSPSC had failed to consider while rejecting their applications. The single judge directed the commission to consider the application of the petitioners therein individually and also allowing the candidates to submit their individual representations. Referring to an earlier ruling of the apex court which was critical about the possibility of distrust in the working of the commission. Justice Vinod Kumar said, “however after four decades, the change as envisaged, in the conduct of service commission in dealing with such public appointments seems to be far from being realised, as it is well known that whenever a general recruitment is undertaken, the same is embroiled in litigation in one form or the other”.
Contempt plea closed
Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili closed a contempt petition filed against Chitra Ramachandran, Principal Secretary to the Higher Education, and Navin Mittal, Commissioner of Collegiate Education for the Government of Telangana. Syed Baba Moinuddin Quadri filed the contempt alleging that the orders passed by the High Court directing the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for the post of principal. Though he retired from the services at the time of passing the orders, the court directed the government to give notional benefit to the petitioner. However, the respondent alleged that they could not comply with the order as the review was pending before the court and the same was disposed of only in January. Further the respondent informed that they had filed an appeal before the court. However, the respondent has extended the notional benefit to the petitioner.
Corruption case
Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili declined to give any interim relief to VD Rajgopal, former Director of Mines, in a complaint filed against him under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CBI filed a charge sheet in 2016 making certain allegations against the petitioner. The criminal court recently took cognisance of the same for which the petitioner moved the court. The matter was adjourned by 2 weeks.
Now you can get handpicked stories from Telangana Today on Telegram everyday. Click the link to subscribe.
Click to follow Telangana Today Facebook page and Twitter .
