Hyderabad: Telangana high court has ruled that a candidate’s local status must be determined with reference to the qualifying examination prescribed for the post, cautioning that ignoring this principle could result in the injustice to those who completed higher education in the state.A division bench comprising Justice P Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda delivered the ruling while dismissing a writ appeal filed by the Telangana Public Service Commission (TGPSC) in connection with recruitment of assistant executive engineers (AEEs).The court upheld a Nov 2023 single judge order in favour of Palla Nishanth of Suryapet district, confirming that candidates who studied in Andhra Pradesh but completed their BTech in Telangana must be recognised as local.‘Presidential order, 2018’The dispute revolved around interpretation of the Presidential Order, 2018. TGPSC argued that local status should be strictly based on schooling from classes I to VII.“Because the petitioner completed his early schooling in Andhra Pradesh, he could not be recognised as a local candidate in Telangana,” the commission maintained. Counsel for the candidate countered that since the minimum qualification for the AEE post is a BTech degree, the criteria for local status should align with completion of that qualification.The petitioner showed he had completed four consecutive academic years in Telangana leading up to his BTech, thereby fulfilling the requirement.Rejecting the commission’s stance, the bench held that paragraph 7 of the Presidential Order must be read in the context of its overall purpose. “Enforcing a class VII benchmark for every post – including degree level, technical, and professional roles – would defeat the intent of the rules,” the judges observed, stressing that local status must rest on legal standards rather than administrative convenience.The court further noted that treating candidates who completed higher education in Telangana as non-locals merely due to early schooling history would be unjust. It criticised TGSPSC for inconsistent and contradictory arguments, describing its approach as ‘non-application of mind’ and unnecessarily hostile toward the candidate.The bench reminded that as a constitutional recruitment body, TGPSC must maintain consistent standards and cannot declare candidates ineligible on shifting grounds.It added that such litigation wastes public resources and judicial time while jeopardising career opportunities. The appeal was dismissed, with the court making it clear that the commission cannot repeatedly reopen the issue on new grounds.
