Telangana High Court reserves orders on Group-1 exam
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocates G Vidya Sagar, K S Murthy, and B Rachna termed the exam process 'haphazard' and 'marred by massive illegalities'.
Vidya Sagar argued that the TGPSC failed to adhere to mandatory statutory procedures by failing to notify each and every procedural aspect, such as rounds of evaluation, moderation methods, or re-evaluation, via a gazette notification. He argued that the TGPSC failed to disclose these critical processes, thereby compromising the transparency and fairness of the examination.
Rachna raised concerns over issuance of two hall ticket numbers to individual candidates, causing confusion among those who qualified in the preliminary round. She also alleged that unqualified evaluators assessed the answer scripts written in Telugu, resulting in a low pass percentage of only 18%, in contrast to 30% among English medium candidates.
The counsel also alleged that biometric verification was not properly implemented and questioned the TGPSC's claim that CCTV surveillance was centrally monitored, calling it a suspicious and unverified assertion.
After hearing the arguments, Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao has reserved orders.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
40 minutes ago
- Mint
Judge Blocks ICE From Randomly Stopping Suspected Migrants
(Bloomberg) -- A federal judge in Los Angeles issued a temporary order barring US immigration authorities from stopping people for questioning without cause, the latest fallout from the Trump administration's controversial crackdown on migrants in California and across the US. A temporary restraining order sought by a group of Southern California residents, workers and advocacy groups was granted Friday by US District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, escalating another legal clash between immigrant rights groups and President Donald Trump's administration. The judge barred agents in the Los Angeles area from stopping and questioning individuals without reasonable suspicion that they're in the US illegally. The order forbids the agents from basing their suspicion on race, ethnicity, speaking Spanish, speaking English with an accent, the type of the work they do or where they are located. The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The groups argued that federal officials 'must have an objective, particularized basis' to believe that a person is in the US illegally before they can stop them and require they answer questions. To do otherwise, they argue, amounts to illegal racial profiling. They also asked the judge to order that anyone detained be provided access to lawyers. The order by Frimpong, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, is a rebuke to the administration's raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in public spaces to make mass arrests. It comes as a wide swath of the most populous state's Democratic elected officials, from Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to Governor Gavin Newsom, have slammed President Donald Trump's administration for what they describe as heavy-handed tactics. The disputed tactics include using National Guard troops to protect ICE agents during immigration sweeps and deploying US Marines in downtown Los Angeles to help quell protests, both of which triggered separate lawsuits. But the targeting of suspected migrants by masked and armed immigration agents has been a focal point of Democratic criticism. 'Armed to the hilt, masked, and driving unmarked cars, they have adopted a central strategy of grabbing people first and asking questions later,' the groups said in their request for a restraining order. Trump has argued that his tactics are in line with the president's constitutional authority to carry out immigration policy and that voters elected him to follow through on his vow to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. Trump has frequently portrayed migrants as criminals who pose a threat to Americans, but court records show many are law-abiding noncitizens have been swept up across the country. The groups that sued in Los Angeles, the second-largest US metropolitan area and a focal point of Trump's effort, argued in court filings that federal immigration agents are violating the Constitution by conducting stops 'without reasonable suspicion' that the individuals were in the US illegally. The agents are trying to meet 'an arbitrary quota for 3,000 daily arrests imposed by the White House,' the groups said. 'But while defendants may believe that immigration enforcement can be a numbers game, the Fourth Amendment requires that seizures be reasonable,' they said in a filing. The filings cite detailed examples of alleged wrongdoing by federal agents, including a man who says he was 'grabbed' at a car wash and interrogated by agents who knew 'nothing more at the time than that he had brown skin and was present at the car wash.' Another man, a plaintiff in the suit, was detained at a tow yard where he was working on his car. 'He told them he was American, but they violently persisted in their questioning, demanding that he tell him what hospital he was born in, and only let him go after he showed them his Real ID, for which they had not even asked,' according to the filing. The plaintiffs argue that 'roving patrols' targeting day laborers, street vendors, farm workers and other were 'expressly directed' by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who told high level officials at ICE to 'just go out there and arrest' unauthorized noncitizens by rounding them up in public spaces like 'Home Depot' and '7-Eleven' stores, according to court filings. The group alleges that similar racial profiling has been underway at raids in agricultural sites, bus stops, packing houses and churches. --With assistance from Robert Burnson. More stories like this are available on
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
40 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Judge blocks racial profiling by immigration officials in LA crackdown
A federal judge in Los Angeles issued a temporary order barring US immigration authorities from stopping people for questioning without cause, the latest fallout from the Trump administration's controversial crackdown on migrants in California and across the US. A temporary restraining order sought by a group of Southern California residents, workers and advocacy groups was granted Friday by US District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, escalating another legal clash between immigrant rights groups and President Donald Trump's administration. The judge barred agents in the Los Angeles area from stopping and questioning individuals without reasonable suspicion that they're in the US illegally. The order forbids the agents from basing their suspicion on race, ethnicity, speaking Spanish, speaking English with an accent, the type of the work they do or where they are located. Tricia McLaughlin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, said 'a district judge is undermining the will of the American people.' 'America's brave men and women are removing murderers, MS-13 gang members, pedophiles, rapists — truly the worst of the worst — from Golden State communities,' she said in an emailed statement. 'Law and order will prevail.' The groups argued that federal officials 'must have an objective, particularized basis' to believe that a person is in the US illegally before they can stop them and require they answer questions. To do otherwise, they alleged, amounts to illegal racial profiling. They also asked the judge to order that anyone detained be provided access to lawyers — which she granted. The order by Frimpong, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, is a rebuke to the administration's raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in public spaces to make mass arrests. It comes as a wide swath of the most populous state's Democratic elected officials, from Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to Governor Gavin Newsom, have slammed President Donald Trump's administration for what they describe as heavy-handed tactics. The disputed tactics include using National Guard troops to protect ICE agents during immigration sweeps and deploying US Marines in downtown Los Angeles to help quell protests, both of which triggered separate lawsuits. But the targeting of suspected migrants by masked and armed immigration agents has been a focal point of Democratic criticism. 'Armed to the hilt, masked, and driving unmarked cars, they have adopted a central strategy of grabbing people first and asking questions later,' the groups said in their request for a restraining order. Trump has argued that his tactics are in line with the president's constitutional authority to carry out immigration policy and that voters elected him to follow through on his vow to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. Trump has frequently portrayed migrants as criminals who pose a threat to Americans, but court records show many are law-abiding noncitizens have been swept up across the country. The groups that sued in Los Angeles, the second-largest US metropolitan area and a focal point of Trump's effort, argued in court filings that federal immigration agents are violating the Constitution by conducting stops 'without reasonable suspicion' that the individuals were in the US illegally. The agents are trying to meet 'an arbitrary quota for 3,000 daily arrests imposed by the White House,' the groups said. 'But while defendants may believe that immigration enforcement can be a numbers game, the Fourth Amendment requires that seizures be reasonable,' they said in a filing. The filings cite detailed examples of alleged wrongdoing by federal agents, including a man who says he was 'grabbed' at a car wash and interrogated by agents who knew 'nothing more at the time than that he had brown skin and was present at the car wash.' Another man, a plaintiff in the suit, was detained at a tow yard where he was working on his car. 'He told them he was American, but they violently persisted in their questioning, demanding that he tell him what hospital he was born in, and only let him go after he showed them his Real ID, for which they had not even asked,' according to the filing. The plaintiffs argue that 'roving patrols' targeting day laborers, street vendors, farm workers and other were 'expressly directed' by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who told high level officials at ICE to 'just go out there and arrest' unauthorized noncitizens by rounding them up in public spaces like 'Home Depot' and '7-Eleven' stores, according to court filings. The groups allege that similar racial profiling has been underway at raids in agricultural sites, bus stops, packing houses and churches. Newsom praised Friday's ruling, saying 'justice prevailed,' while Bass said it affirms 'the Constitution, American values and decency.' 'This is an important step toward restoring safety, security and defending the rights of all Angelenos,' she said in a statement.
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
High Court stays defamation case against CM
The High Court has stayed the trial proceedings against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in a high-profile defamation case filed by the BJP, which alleges that the Congress leader defamed the party through front-page newspaper advertisements accusing the previous BJP-led state government of large-scale corruption. A single-judge bench headed by Justice S R Krishna Kumar passed the interim order while hearing a petition filed by Siddaramaiah seeking to quash the private complaint lodged by BJP state secretary and Legislative Council member B.S. Keshav Prasad. During the hearing, Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty, appearing for the Chief Minister, argued that the trial court had already stayed proceedings against the other accused in the same case and hence the same relief should be extended to the Chief Minister as well. After considering the submissions, the bench ordered a stay on the trial pending further hearings. Advocate Surya Mukundaraj also appeared for the petitioner. The defamation case dates back to the run-up to the May 2023 Assembly elections when the Congress made corruption allegations a central theme of its campaign. On May 5, 2023, the Congress published advertisements on the front pages of major Kannada and English newspapers, branding the BJP regime as a '40% commission government.' The ads alleged that the BJP had institutionalised corruption by fixing bribes for postings and tenders, and that kickbacks of 25–30% were being taken in Covid supplies, public works, temple and mutt grants, midday meal eggs, and road projects. The ads concluded with the sensational claim that the BJP government had siphoned off ₹1.5 lakh crore over its term, urging voters to reject what the Congress labelled a 'Trouble Engine Government' — a pun on the BJP's 'Double Engine Government' pitch. Following their defeat in the polls, the BJP hit back legally, claiming the allegations were baseless and amounted to a malicious attempt to tarnish the party's image, mislead voters, and influence the election outcome. The private complaint names not only Siddaramaiah but also Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar and senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi as responsible for approving and disseminating the advertisements. While the stay provides temporary relief for Siddaramaiah, the case is expected to remain a point of political friction as the BJP continues to accuse the ruling Congress of crossing ethical lines during the bitterly fought election. The matter will next come up for further hearing in the High Court.
