Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

IN THE JUDICATURE OF THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HYDERABAD


Between:

Sunand P,
28, Bal Reddy Nagar,
Toli Chowki, Hyd- 8. ---- PETITIONER


And

1. Dr. Y. Venkatarami Reddy,
Chairman, APPSC,
Nampally Hyderabad.

2. Mr. Venkat Reddy,
Member, APPSC,
Nampally, Hyderabad.

3. Mr. B. Ramakrishna Raju,
Member, APPSC,
Nampally, Hyderabad.

4. Mr. T. Bhadraiah,
Ex-Member, APPSC,
Nampally, Hyderabad.

5. Mrs. Renu Khosla,
Ex- Member, APPSC,
Nampally Hyderabad.

6. Shri Harpreet Singh (IAS)
Ex- Secretary, APPSC
Presently Managing Director of
A.P. Diary Development,
Hyderabad. --- RESPONDENTS




MATERIAL PAPER INDEX



S.No. Description of the documents Pages Annexure

1. Judgment copy of the Hon’ble 2 I
SCIC, APIC, Hyderabad

2. Covering letter given by the APPSC 2 II

3. Marks sheet of Group-I provided by 6 III
the APPSC under the RTI Act, 2005

4. E-version of a book written by 6 IV
Civil Services Toppers.

5. Marks sheet of Group-II provided 6 V
by the APPSC under the RTI Act,
2005

6. Marks copies of certain exams
conducted by the Tamil Nadu 6 VI
Public Service Commission.

7. Copies of Newspaper articles 6 VII
(Eenadu, Surya)alleging irregularities
in award of interview marks by the
Chairman and Members, APPSC.

8. Copies of Newspaper articles 2 VIII
(The Hindu) which shows MLAs’from TDP
and CPI submitting a memorandum to the
Hon’ble Governor of AP.

9. Compact Disc featuring a program telecast by
TV5, a reputed Telugu News channel, alleging
disproportionate assets owned by the Chairman.


Sir, I, Sunand P, R/o 28, Bal Reddy Nagar, Toli Chowki, Hyderabd-8, do solemnly swear and affirm that everything mentioned and enclosed along with this petition is true to the best of my knowledge.


Sir, it was only after a long drawn fight of over a year that I could have access to information regarding the Names, Community, Marks secured in the written exam and marks awarded in the interviews of the selected candidates. Even that was enabled only because the Hon’ble State Chief Information Commissioner, APIC directed the APPSC to furnish the information. (please refer to Annex. I). The APPSC furnished the information and it was delivered to me on the 3rd of March, 2010 (please refer Annex. II)


Sir, the analysis of the data pertaining to recruitments made by the APPSC under Notification No. 21/ 2003 to 312 plum Group-I posts, viz., Deputy Collector, Deputy SP, CTO, RTO, Municipal Commissioner, Dy. Registrar Co-op Societies, revealed shocking details.


Sir, it was shocking to note that the average marks of the selected candidates belonging to a particular community was 73 out of 90 marks, which in itself is more than 80%, while the average marks for OCs (other than that community) was a reasonable 64 out of 90 marks; and 60 for SCs, 60 for BCs and 53 for STs. (please refer to Annex III).


That’s not all Sir, an unbelievably high 136 out of 550 candidates (312 plum Group-1 posts plus 238 MPDO posts) were awarded marks equal to or more than 80% in the interviews, i.e. 72 or more out of 90. Further, a staggering 36 candidates were awarded 81 marks or more, i.e. in excess of 90% with the highest being 88 out of 90 HT No. 12219893, i.e., an unprecedented 98%.


Here it is pertinent to mention that, I am sure that you would be aware that the UPSC and other Public Service Commissions in India hardly, if ever, award more than 80% in the interview to any candidate. In a book titled ‘How to Crack Civil Services’ written by Civil Service Toppers which includes the All India Topper Mr. Mutyala Raju Revu in the year 2006, it is specifically mentioned that the interview marks for the UPSC are in the range of 50-240 out of 300 (please refer to Annex IV). In that year (2006), not even a single candidate scored more than 80% in the interviews, the highest being 231 out of 300.


Sir, in this regard, I humbly request you to call for records of interview marks awarded by the UPSC in the past (any reasonable span of time) and in the case of APPSC before the year 2005, i.e. in the instances of recruitments made before the incumbent Chairman and Members took charge. Sir, I believe that the comparison of the marks awarded by the UPSC and the erstwhile Interview Boards of the APPSC with those of the marks awarded in Group-I interviews conducted in the year 2006 would make the irregularities committed in the instant case crystal clear.


As if that’s not enough Sir, the discrimination shown towards candidates (some highly meritorious) claiming reservation is beyond belief. To quote a few examples, Sir :


As regards 312 plum posts of the Group-1 Services, viz. Dy. Collector, DSP, CTO, Municipal Commissioner, RTO, etc. 24 candidates were given less than 40 marks out of 90 marks in the interviews. Out of the 24 candidates, 14 belong to the BCs (i.e. 58%). Least marks (13 out of 90) were awarded to SC candidates.


But most striking is the case of Mr.Shiva Lingaiah Chettipally (BC-B) bearing HT No.12203120. He got a top score of 687 out of 900 in the written exam, but got only 32 in the interview taking his tally to 719 out of 990 and had to be content with 4th overall.


Similarly, Mr.Chandra Shekar Goud (BC-B) bearing HT No.12232100 secured 678 marks in the written (2nd highest ) but was awarded only 28 in the interview taking to total to 706. He missed the chance of becoming a Deputy Collector (DC) by 1 mark.


Similarly, Ms. Haritha Mundrathi bearing HT No. 12232473 who secured the highest written score (613) among the women Deputy Collectors. However, only 21 marks were awarded to her and she lost the opportunity of becoming a DC in the open category and had to claim reservation.


Similarly, Mr.Gangadhar Reddy (BC-D) bearing HT.No 10601169 scored 649 but was awarded only 21 in the interview. Someone who could have made it into DC in open competition had to settle for DSP.


Almost similar is the case of Mr.Narasimha Rao Ch (SC) bearing HTNo.10703131 who got a decent score of 598 but was awarded the least of all just 13 marks in the interview and had to settle for Assistant Audit Officer., though people who had scored lesser marks than him in the written got Dy.SP and that too in open competition.


Another incident relates to Mr.Samayjan Rao Ch (SC) bearing HT No.10606097 who secured 616 marks in written, i.e. joint 3rd highest among all the candidates selected for DSP post but only 13.5 in the interview. The combined tally now placed him on 21st position and he had to settle for the post of DSP under reservation quota


Thus, many reserved candidates who could have made it in the open competition by virtue of high marks in the written seem to have been slighted in the interviews. Thus, they had to claim reservation and lost the opportunity of making it in the open. In effect, many candidates who could have filled the vacancies that would have remained in the “reservation pool” had lost out on getting employment.


Sir, such blatant nepotism on one hand and the evident discrimination on the other hand is in gross violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in our Constitution because Article 16 provides for equality of opportunity in matters of public employment irrespective of caste, creed, sex, religion, etc.


Sir, as regards Group-II services, viz., posts like Dy. Tahsildar, ACTO, Excise S.I., Sub- Registrar, etc under Notification No. 10/ 2004, 169 out of 614 were awarded marks equal to or in excess of 40 out of 50 marks, i.e. 80%. Further, a staggering 60 candidates were awarded marks equal to or in excess of 45 out of 50, i.e. 90%. (Please refer to Annex. V)


Here it is significant to mention again that the UPSC or any other PSC, hardly, if ever, award more than 80% marks in an interview to any candidate. The TNPSC too does not award more than 80% marks to any candidate in the interviews (please refer to Annex. VI).


However, when it comes to shockingly low marks in the interviews for both Group-I and Group-II services, candidates belonging to BC, SC and ST communities invariably formed the overwhelming majority !


Sir, kindly refer to these statistics which pertain to those candidates who scored more than 250 out of 450 marks, i.e., more than 55% marks in the Group-II written exam. Out of the 73 candidates who were given 25 marks or less out of 50 marks in the interviews, 41 (i.e.56%) are BCs, 15 SCs, 10 STs, OCs making the rest (7). Sir, I have all the records pertaining to Group-I and Group-II recruitments made in the year 2006 and I would be most obliged to present them for your kind perusal.


Sir, the gross irregularities committed by the APPSC was highlighted by the print as well as the electronic media. Sir, another important point to note is that , out of the 11 posts of Deputy Collectors that were in open competition, 8 were bagged by candidates belonging to a particular community by virtue of phenomenally high marks in the interviews. .(please refer to Annex VII).


Sir, keeping in view the seriousness of the irregularities committed, the AP State Assembly, on the 27th of March, was adjourned over this issue and later MLAs from the TDP, the CPI submitted a memorandum to the Hon’ble Governor of AP (please refer to Annex VIII).


Sir, lakhs of people appear for the exams conducted by the APPSC for various posts. Such serious irregularity on the part of the powers that be raises questions on the fairness, objectivity of the selection process itself. Sir, only a thorough probe, without any further delay, can uncover the truth and only then will some amount of credibility and respectability be restored to the APPSC.


Sir, in addition to all this, a reputed Telugu News Channel, TV5 aired a special program alleging that the incumbent Chairman of the APPSC owns disproportionate assets (please refer to the CD that has been enclosed). Sir, I humbly request you to order a CBI enquiry to bring out the truth.



Prayer:

Sir, keeping in view the grave irregularities, I humbly pray and request you to exercise the powers vested in you by virtue of Article 226 of our Constitution and issue a writ of mandamus or issue any other directions or order or orders as you deem fit and necessary and call for records, from the APPSC, of the interview marks awarded by each Interview Board, separately, to all the candidates who appeared for the Group-I and Group-II interviews in the years 2006 and 2009. Sir, I request you to kindly also ask for marks assigned in the interview and reported in writing, individually, by each member of the Interview Board.

Sir, I humbly pray and request you to call for records of the interview marks awarded to Group-I and Group-II candidates by each Interview Board of the APPSC prior to 2005, i.e., before the incumbent Chairman and Members took charge so as to compare them with the marks awarded in Group-I and Group-II recruitments in the years 2006 and in 2009.

Sir, equally importantly, kindly exercise your powers and direct the UPSC to furnish interview marks awarded to Civil Services candidates (over any reasonable span of time that you deem fit) so that a comparison with the marks awarded by the APPSC would make the irregularities on the part of APPSC explicitly apparent.

Sir, I also humbly pray and request you to constitute a CBI enquiry to look into the allegations of corruption in recruitments and amassing of disproportionate assets by the incumbent Chairman, APPSC as reported by the News Channel TV5.


Regards,


(Sunand P)