The High Court dismissed two petitions filed regarding the Group-1 notification. Several candidates have filed two separate petitions challenging the examination to be conducted as per the notification issued in 2022 for the filling up of Group-1 posts and the objections to the primary key being incorrect and the objections to be revised being ignored.
–Galla S Kiran Kumar, Bureau Chief
Hyderabad: High Court dismissed two petitions filed regarding Group-1 notification. Several candidates have filed two separate petitions challenging the examination to be conducted as per the notification issued in 2022 for the filling up of Group-1 posts and the objections to the primary key being incorrect and the objections to be revised being ignored. Justice Pulla Karthik conducted an inquiry on these and pronounced the verdict on Tuesday. Regarding the questions in the preliminary examination, only one petitioner has submitted objections within the time limit and only those objections are being considered. The petitioners who raised objections on 14 questions in the petition said that they heard arguments on only 8 questions. It has been clarified that the candidates should not expect straightforward questions in the examinations for appointments to the posts of senior officials. He justified giving tricky questions. It was concluded that the TGPSC released the results only after the release of the key after considering the 6,417 objections raised by 1,721 people and the expert committee of the respective subjects and concluded that it cannot be interfered with. He said that the Supreme Court has clearly stated in several judgments that the decision of the expert committee in academic matters is final and the courts should not interfere. He said that the courts cannot interfere with the discretionary power under Article 226 in the opinions of experts in technical and scientific matters. The petition was dismissed as the answers given by the commission to the doubts of the petitioners were satisfactory. The judge found it wrong that the petitioners approached the court after 6 months of canceling the first notification. If the cancellation of the notification issued in 2022 caused loss to the petitioners, they could have approached the court after putting the web notice in February this year. After six months, those who came to the court stated that they did not show any reason for the delay, hence the petition is being dismissed.
