SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1548

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J. 
P. Prasanna Latha and Others - Appellant 
Vs.
State of Telangana And Another - Respondent 
Writ Petition No. 24377 of 2019
Decided On : 18-11-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Prabhakar Chikkudu
For the Respondent: GP For General Administration TG

Inclusion of candidates with tampered answer sheets in a selection process violates fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16, mandating adherence to judicial directives for fair recruitment practices.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16, 19, and 21 - Challenge to the arbitrary and unconstitutional actions of public authorities in recruitment process - Petitioners aggrieved by the negligent inclusion of candidates whose answer sheets were vitiated and erroneous processes in selection leading to infringement of fundamental rights - Court reinforced principles of fairness, merit, and adherence to judicial direction in recruitment. (Paras 1, 10)

(B) Public Employment - Evaluation of answer sheets - Judicial mandates emphasized that tampering in answer sheets, particularly in performance-related sections, warrants exclusion to ensure integrity - Inclusion based on such flawed evaluation undermines fairness in recruitment process. (Para 9)

(C) Judicial Authority - Importance of abiding by previous judicial direction to protect the spirit of recruitment integrity and applicants' rights - The act of the 2nd respondent was deemed arbitrary and illegal, leading to severe prejudice against genuine candidates. (Paras 6, 9)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, candidates for Group-II Services, challenged the inclusion of candidates with tampered answer sheets in provisional selection notification - this was against the previous judgment mandating exclusion of candidates based on specific conditions which were disregarded by the 2nd respondent, resulting in a clear violation of constitutional rights.

Findings of Court:
The 2nd respondent's provisional selection notification was set aside for failing to adhere to binding judicial principles and arbitrary conduct in candidate evaluation.

Issues: The core issues revolved around adherence to proper evaluation processes according to prior judicial mandates and ensuring only qualifying candidates are included based on integrity.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the act of evaluating answer sheets with tampering violated established judicial prohibitions, highlighting the necessity for transparent and equitable selection processes.

Result: Writ Petition allowed; provisional selection notification dated 24.10.2019 set aside.

Table of Content
1. petitioners claim rights violation in recruitment process. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents argue compliance with judicial directions. (Para 3)
3. petitioners emphasize arbitrariness and unfair practices. (Para 4)
4. court reviews compliance with prior judgments. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
5. court ruling against tgpsc; selection process voided. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)

ORDER :

NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J

Petitioners filed this Writ Petition aggrieved by the arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and unconstitutional action of the 2nd respondent - Telangana State Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as "TGPSC"), in issuing Provisional Selection Notification dated 24.10.2019 pursuant to Group-II Services Notification No. 20/2015 dated 31.12.2015 and Revised Notification No. 17/2016 dated 01.09.2016, without adhering to due process of law, in contravention of the binding directions issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 1525 of 2018 and its batch dated 03.06.2019, thereby infringing the fundamental rights of petitioners guaranteed under Articles 14, 16, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. The case of petitioners is that they are meritorious candidates who appeared in Group-II Services Examination conducted by the 2nd respondent on 11.11.2016 and 13.11.2016 for Papers I to IV, pursuant to the aforesaid Notifications. Having secured merit in the written examination, they became eligible for consideration in selection process. However, to their utter shock and dismay, respondents, while issuing the impugned provisional selection notification, included candidates whose answer sheets were vitiated by tampering, overwriting, erasures, and other violations of the prescribed instructions contained in the Notification itself, thereby caused irreparable prejudice to petitioners' legitimate right to fair consideration for appointment.

2.1. It is stated, as per the express stipulations contained in the recruitment Notification and examination instructions, each OMR answer sheet was divided into three parts: Part-A (personal details), Part-B (the middle portion containing the actual answers), and Part-C (candidate's name and invigilator's signatures). The Notification categorically declared that any tampering, overwriting, erasure, or usage of whiteners in any part of the OMR sheet would render it invalid for evaluation. These conditions were not mere procedural formalities but substantive safeguards meant to ensure transparency, integrity and uniformity in evaluation. Despite such mandatory conditions, the 2nd respondent, in a most arbitrary and discriminatory manner, considered and evaluated OMR answer sheets of several candidates who had committed errors and manipulations in Part-B, which directly pertains to performance evaluation, thereby distorting the merit structure and prejudicing the rights of genuine candidates, including petitioners. Such deviation from the prescribed rules and procedure amounts to a colourable exercise of power, offending the constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 16, and violating the rule of law which forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

2.2. Petitioners further state that earlier, in Writ Petition No. 18834 of 2017, this Court, upon elaborate consideration, had directed deletion of all the candidates who had committed mistakes in Part-A, Part-B, and Part-C from selection list. The said order was carried in appeal by the affected candidates in Writ Appeal Nos. 1525 and 1527 of 2018 and batch, wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench, after an exhaustive consideration of the report of the Technical Committee dated 09.03.2017, held that only mistakes in Part-A and Part-C, being peripheral and not affecting the candidate's performance, could be ignored, but the errors in Part-B - middle portion containing the answers could not be condoned. The operative portion of the Division Bench judgment is extracted hereunder:

" The Technical Committee in its report dated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top