The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday reserved its orders concerning a series of interlocutory applications (IAs) filed in the reopened appeal petitions related to the contentious APPSC Group I recruitment case. The bench, visibly displeased, noted that the flurry of applications appeared to be a deliberate attempt to prolong the litigation.
Court's Frustration Over Prolonged Proceedings
The bench comprising Justices Battu Devanand and Hari Haranatha Sharma did not mince words in expressing its frustration. It observed that the filing of numerous interlocutory applications, coupled with the failure to serve papers to the opposing side promptly, seemed like calculated delaying tactics that wasted the court's valuable time. The justices pointed out that most reliefs sought in these fresh applications were either already covered in earlier arguments or were irrelevant at the current stage of proceedings.
Core Arguments from Both Sides
The court had previously agreed to reopen the appeal petitions based on applications from successful candidates. This decision considered the findings of a court-constituted committee and subsequent details that emerged after orders were initially reserved. The successful candidates, represented by senior counsel C V Mohan Reddy, sought several directives including:
- Impleading the Commissioner of Collegiate Education as a party respondent.
- Noting APPSC files related to the preparation of evaluator lists.
- Directing the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to submit a forensic report on OMR sheets and control bundles in a sealed cover.
- Providing observations made by the court's committee during OMR sheet verification.
Mohan Reddy argued that calling for these records was essential for ensuring transparency in the reopened matter. However, opposing the IAs, senior counsel Jandhyala Ravi Shankar, representing unsuccessful candidates, contended that the purpose of reopening was not to re-adjudicate the entire case. He emphasized that arguments on the issues raised in the new applications had already been extensively submitted by both sides earlier.
Path Forward and Final Hearing
The High Court clarified that the petitions were reopened for a specific purpose following the committee's findings, and there was no need to revisit all previously argued issues. After considering all submissions, the bench reserved orders on the interlocutory applications. It stated that the final hearing of the main appeals would be taken up on the same day after the pronouncement of orders in these IAs. This move aims to streamline the process and prevent further procedural delays in the long-pending case.
