Telangana: After Court-Ordered Re-Evaluation, 1,137 Intermediate Students Pass

When the results were announced, students, parents, students organisations and political parties protested that there were irregularities.

Hyderabad: The Telangana State Board of Intermediate Education (TSBIE), which faced flak over alleged bungling in publication of results, on Monday said that 1,137 candidates of the 3.8 lakh students whose answer scripts were re-evaluated after they failed in the exams in March, were declared passed.

The announcement of exam results last month had led to protests by students, parents, students organisations and political parties over alleged goof-up in the evaluation process.

Several students across Telangana, including the nephew of Telugu Desam Party Rajya Sabha MP C.M. Ramesh, reportedly committed suicide as they failed to clear the intermediate (Class XII) examination.

Government officials had said that errors in the OMR sheets (by examiners), among other things, were noticed.

The BIE said in a release on Monday night that 9,43,005 candidates appeared for the Intermediate exams in March.

Of these, 5,60,889 passed while 3,82,116 failed, it said.

TSBIE said re-verification of answer scripts of failed candidates began on April 26 on the directions of the high court.

A second level check, using artificial intelligence and scanning for 19,788 answer scripts, is still underway.

Efforts are being made to complete testing, scanning and uploading by Monday night or Tuesday morning, the release said.

After re-verification, 1,137 candidates were declared to have passed, of whom 552 were from second year and 585 from the first year, it said.

The second year candidates are eligible to pursue higher education, it added.

Four Years After the Birth of Telangana, Andhra Gets Its Own High Court

Till now, the high court in Hyderabad had been functioning as the common high court for both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh: More than four years after its bifurcation to create Telangana, Andhra Pradesh got its own high court here Tuesday.

Governor E.S.L. Narasimhan swore in Acting Chief Justice C. Praveen Kumar and 13 other judges at a function in nearby Vijayawada.

President Ram Nath Kovind had last week issued orders for a separate high court of Andhra Pradesh.

Till now, the high court in Hyderabad had been functioning as the common high court for both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

The 13 judges sworn in are Justices S.V. Bhatt, A.V. Sesha Sai, M Seetharama Murti, U. Durga Prasad Rao, T. Sunil Chowdary, M. Satyanarayana Murthy, G. Shyam Prasad, J. Uma Devi, N. Balayogi, T. Rajani, D.V.S.S. Somayajulu, K. Vijaya Lakshmi and M. Ganga Rao.

Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu called it a “historic day”.

“I am very happy legal administration is beginning in the state today. With the inauguration of the high court, the state bifurcation process has come to an end, barring distribution of assets,” he said.

As the temporary building to accommodate the high court in the state capital here was not ready yet, the state government converted chief minister’s camp office in Vijayawada into ad-hoc court premises.

Supreme Court Judge Justice N.V. Ramana inaugurated the ad-hoc premises in the presence of the chief minister and others.

While the temporary building is expected to be ready by the end of January, the actual high court complex will be built in another three years.

Independent Inquiry Slams Pune Police for ‘Inaction’ During Bhima Koregaon Violence

The inquiry has concluded that the violence could have been controlled had the police and state administration reacted promptly to the “premeditated” violence, and has demanded an inquiry against “erring officers”.

Mumbai: A non-official inquiry conducted by a retired high court judge and two district judges has come down heavily on the police and particularly the then superintendent of Pune police (rural) Mohd. Suvez Haq for its “inaction and inability to control the mob” that had unleashed violence on the huge gathering of Bahujans at Bhima Koregaon outside Pune on January 1.

As part of an independent inquiry initiated by anti-caste activists and social groups, Justice (retired) B. Chandra Kumar of the Hyderabad high court, along with two district judges of Maharashtra, J.H. Dongre and Manik Mhakre, had travelled to Bhima Koregaon and the nearby villages, and recorded exhaustive testimonies of the victims, bystanders and the police on duty.

The inquiry has concluded that the violence could have been controlled had the police and state administration reacted promptly to the “premeditated” violence.

The inquiry report that has been accessed by The Wire has already been submitted to the state set two- member judicial inquiry commission headed by the former chief justice of Calcutta high court J.N. Patel and Sumit Mullick, former chief secretary of the Maharashtra government.

The inquiry committee has observed that, “On January 1, a huge mob of nearly 2,000 people carrying lathis and saffron flags from Vadhu Budruk area were allowed to head towards the Vijay Stambh (the memorial built to commemorate the defeat of the Brahmin Peshwa soldiers by a Mahar Battalion of British East India Company comprising Dalits in 1818).”

The observation, which is based on the testimonies of the victims and other eye witnesses has also concluded that: “Superintendent of Police Mohd. Suvez Haq and other police officers were also present and observed the procession… No steps were taken by the police to stop this procession. Not even a suggestion was given to them not to proceed towards the places where the vehicles were parked or to the main road through which people were proceeding towards Vijay Stambh.”

Haq, soon after the riots, was transferred to the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad as the deputy inspector general and on August 8 was inducted into the CBI as a superintendent of police. Several attempts were made to reach Haq but his phone has been out of reach. The story will be updated once he responds to the report’s findings.

Justice (retired) B. Chandra Kumar. Credit: YouTube

Speaking to The Wire, Justice Chandra Kumar said that the incident could have been nipped in the bud had the police responded to the situation promptly. “The police were deployed at the spot. The SP was present there too. However, from the testimonies of the villagers and victims who were brutalised in the attack we have concluded that the police had intentionally not taken any action against the rioters. They allowed the riot to grow out of control,” Justice Chandra Kumar said.

The committee has also considered the events prior to Elgar Parishad meet at Shaniwarwada on December 31 as the reason behind the violence. The Pune police has so far arrested ten persons including lawyers, activists and academics for their alleged role in “naxal activities” and for instigating the mob and also funding the violence. However, the fact-finding committee has observed that the events that unfolded in and around Bhima Koregaon villages since December 27 and especially on December 29 at Vadhu Budruk village were behind the attack.

Contrary to some reports in the media, the committee has blamed the activities in Sanaswadi and Vadhu Budruk villages to be behind the violence. Vadhu Budruk village in Shirur Tehsil, which is less than four kilometres away from Bhima Koregaon is another significant place in the history, where the samadhi of King Sambhaji – son of King Shivaji – was built. Sanaswadi is around 7.5 km from Bhima Koregaon.

Justice Chandra Kumar, in the report, has observed that specific orders were issued at the village level three-four days prior to the January 1 celebration. Both at Vadhu Budruk and Sanaswadi, Hindutva leader Milind Ekbote has been actively working and has been allegedly instigating the Marathas against the Dalits. “Sanaswadi Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution on December 30, 2017, directing the people to observe ‘Total Bandh’ and to observe January 1, 2018, as a ‘Black Day’, the committee has observed.

Ekbote, who was arrested in March by the Pune police, was promptly released on bail. He and another Hindutva leader Manohar alias Sambhaji Bhide were named in the initial FIR for allegedly instigating the mob against the Dalits. No action has been initiated against Bhide so far and the police is yet to file a chargesheet in the case. The FIR was registered after Bharip Bahujan Mahasangh’s leader Prakash Ambedkar named the two as the masterminds behind the violence.

“Three to four days prior to 1st January 2018, several messages were sent out on WhatsApp, Facebook and other social media on behalf of Manohar alias Samhaji Bhide and Samastha Hindu Agadhi (run by Ekbote) instigating the people to observe ‘Bandh’ on 1st January 2018, in the Village Perne Phata, Bhima Koregaon, Shikrapur, Vagholi, Sanaswadi, Lonikand and nearby 10-15 villages,” the report observed. The report claims all hotels around the vicinity were specifically instructed by the two to strictly observe a bandh so that the people coming to pay respect to Vijay Stambh would not get drinking water, breakfast, lunch, etc. “A threat was also given that those who do not observe ‘Bandh’ or provide water, etc. to the people coming for paying respect to Vijay Stambh would have to face dire consequences,” the inquiry report further observed.

Justice Chandra Kumar said the incident in Sanaswadi in particular was of a peculiar nature. “The gram panchayat had passed a resolution to socially boycott thousands of Dalits travelling to Bhima Koregoan. This boycott is a clear case of caste violence. It was brought to the police’s notice. Yet, the police decided to not respond to it,” he said. The committee has also observed that there was a total failure of intelligence in securing information and in taking preventive action.

Besides the three judges, the team also comprised of lawyers and social activists from Pune.  Justice Chandra Kumar said the exercise was intentionally carried out with judges and lawyers to ensure proper legal processes were followed and that the documentation was conducted without any distortion of facts.

The All India Backward and Minority Communities Employees Federation (BAMCEF), an organisation set up by the late Kanshi Ram provided the logistic support to the inquiry committee. BAMCEF along with Samata Sainik Dal founded by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar has been working actively in organising the processions and visits to Bhima Koregaon for several decades.

This is the first part of the report, the second part focusses on the protests that were organised across the state that led to indiscriminate police action against over 27000 Bahujan youths including teenage boys across Maharashtra. “That report will be finalised in a week’s time and will be submitted to the two- member judicial commission,” confirmed senior lawyer Rahul Makhre, who was also a part of the fact-finding team.

Every year over three-four lakh Dalit Bahujan and anti-caste activists travel to Bhima Koregaon on January 1 and observe ‘Vijay Diwas’ to commemorate the defeat of the Brahmin Peshwa soldiers by a Mahar Battalion of British East India Company comprising Dalits in 1818. This year, since it was the 200th year, the number of visitors had doubled and over six lakh people from across Maharashtra and neighbouring states had travelled to Bhima Koregaon. However, most had to turn back after the violence broke out.

Failure to intervene

Another revelation, the report makes, is of a phone call made by one Ramdas Lokhande to the minister of state for social justice Dilip Kamble. Lokhande, who also deposed before the committee, has apparently informed the minister over a phone call made at 9 am on January 1 that “the people (Dalits visiting Bhima Koregaon) were being obstructed outside the village and the situation was tense.”

Justice Chandra Kumar points out that this SOS call was made in desperation and with the hope of receiving help. “This was the beginning for the riot. In a few minutes, the gathered mob had attacked those heading to Bhima Koregaon, vehicles were burnt, stones were pelted and public and private property were damaged,” he said.

At 11 am, the minister reached the spot and instructed the police to act immediately. However, stones were pelted on his car too. Kamble had then reportedly made a call to Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis between 1.30 and 2.00 pm and had sought for additional police force at Bhima Koregaon. “Even though, the Honourable Minister Dilip Kamble personally talked to the Maharashtra chief minister of at around 11 pm, the police did not deploy any additional force. Even after getting information that shops and houses were attacked and burned and even the victims were making phone calls to the police to save their shops and houses, the police have not taken any steps to save their shops and houses,” the report concluded.

In an hour, the report says, the mob had reached closer to the banks of Bhima river. By 10 am, stones – that were stored in advance at the river bank – were pelted at the visitors. According to some testimonies, rumours of pieces of meat and beer bottles being thrown at one Bhairoba temple at Sanaswadi temple were rife for nearly three-four days. “Even when these rumours were brought to the police’s notice, the police had failed to intervene,” said Justice Chandra Kumar. 

Justice Chandra Kumar has called this act “a systematically planned caste violence”. “In our several rounds of meetings with the villagers, and the police and ongoing through the video recordings of the wide- spread violence, we could not find any convincing reason as to why the police could not stop the mob at its origin (near Vadhu Budruk village) itself. The police had already received complaints on December 29 about the alleged planning of riots that were underway in the neighbouring village, these complaints were also overlooked,” Chandra Kumar said.    

The Centre is Squarely Responsible For Solving Telangana’s Judicial Crisis

According to the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, the bifurcation of the Hyderabad high court and the allocation of judicial officers is to be done by the Centre.

According to the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, the bifurcation of the Hyderabad high court and the allocation of judicial officers is to be done by the Centre.

Telangana advocates protest in Hyderabad. Credit: PTI

Telangana advocates protest in Hyderabad. Credit: PTI

An unprecedented crisis is unfolding in the high court of judicature at Hyderabad. Telangana lawyers have been on strike for a month, eleven judicial officers have been suspended on disciplinary grounds and, for the first time in independent India’s history, 200 judges have gone on mass casual leave in protest. Further, on 1st July, 8,000 employees in various courts and judicial departments across Telangana went on strike and the Federation of Bar Associations has now promised a ‘Jail Bharo’ programme on July 7th.

What is the cause for this unrest? In essence, it boils down to two issues: the bifurcation of the high court of judicature at Hyderabad (the common high court for Telangana and Andhra Pradesh) and the allocation of subordinate judicial officers between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

Bifurcation of the Hyderabad high court

The first and foremost demand of the agitating legal fraternity is the bifurcation of the high court into two separate high courts for Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. This is guaranteed under section 31(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, which states:

Subject to the provisions of section 30, there shall be a separate High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the High Court of Andhra Pradesh) and the High Court of  Judicature at Hyderabad shall become the High Court for the State of Telangana (hereinafter referred to as the High Court at Hyderabad).

Even the Constitution of India guarantees this – article 214 says that there shall be a high court for each state.

Thus it is crystal clear that the bifurcation must happen. The question then is who is responsible for carrying it out. According to law minister Sadananda Gowda, the Centre has no responsibility in the bifurcation. The chief minister of Andhra Pradesh must provide the necessary infrastructure for the new court, following which the chief justice of the Hyderabad high court must act to bifurcate the court.

This assertion flies in the face of the law. As per section 31(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, “The principal seat of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh shall be at such place as the President may, by notified order, appoint.”

The president in effect means the Union cabinet (as per article 74 of the Constitution). This means that it is the Centre’s responsibility to carry out the bifurcation. As it is to be done through a notified order, all that is required is a cabinet decision. The Centre is then actually deflecting responsibility through legally incorrect statements.

Even if the Centre fully accepts responsibility, it can still delay bifurcation on one pretext or the other, as has been done so far. This is because there is no time limit for the bifurcation. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act was passed in chaotic conditions, without a time-bound clause for the court’s bifurcation.

In order to rectify this situation, I introduced a private member’s Bill in the Lok Sabha on November 17, 2015 which put a time limit to the bifurcation by amending section 31(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act. To show its commitment to ending the present crisis, the government can introduce a Bill on the lines of my Bill, which states the high court’s bifurcation must be complete by the end of this year.

Allocation of judicial officers

The registrar general of the Hyderabad high court on May 5 issued a provisional list allocating subordinate judicial officers between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. The list contained 540 judicial officers who were allocated to Andhra Pradesh and 366 to Telangana. However of these, 142 officers – nearly half – who were allocated to Telangana are of Andhra origin (as the district of origin in their application form mentions). Of the 142 officers, 58 are district judges, 31 are senior civil judges and 53 are junior civil judges. The agitators’ main contention is that the district judges, as the most senior officers, have a fair chance of becoming high court judges within the Telangana quota. This has gone down very badly with the legal fraternity of Telangana, who allege a discriminatory attitude from Andhra officers.

Most importantly, from a legal standpoint, the very basis of preparing the provisional list is flawed. It is based on guidelines framed by the chief justice of the Hyderabad high court after consultation with other judges – something they had no mandate to do.

The original task of allocating staff between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh was given to the C.R. Kamalanathan Committee, which recused itself when it came to tasks involving judicial officers, saying it did not have the authority. Guidelines for allocating judicial officers should have been framed by the Centre’s Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), which was not done. The chief justice of the Hyderabad court then took it upon himself to carry out this job.

This is in clear violation of sections 77 and 80 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act. Section 77(2) clearly states that this power is with the central government alone and not the judiciary. According to the sub-section:

As soon as may be after the appointed day, the Central Government shall, by general or special order, determine the successor State to which every person referred to in sub-section (1) shall be finally allotted for service, after consideration of option received by seeking option from the employees, and the date with effect from which such allotment shall take effect or be deemed to have taken effect.

Further, section 80 contemplates the establishment of advisory committees and sub-section (2) states that allocation guidelines on dividing staff (including judicial officers) shall be made only by the central government on the recommendations of these committees:

The allocation guidelines shall be issued by the Central Government on or after the date of enactment of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 and the actual allocation of individual employees shall be made by the Central Government on the recommendations of the Advisory Committee:

Provided that in case of disagreement or conflict of opinion, the decision of the Central Government shall be final;

Provided further that necessary guidelines as and when required shall be framed by the Central Government or as the case may be, by the State Advisory Committee which shall be approved by the Central Government before such guidelines are issued.

It is clear, then, that as per the law it is the Centre’s responsibility to appoint a committee that will allocate judicial officers between the two states. The provisional list is invalid and should be revoked immediately. The Centre should appoint a committee at the earliest to carry out the allocation of judicial officers.

The problem has intensified since the high court has not yet been bifurcated. Had this been done, chief justices of both courts could have resolved the issue amongst themselves, as was done in the case of Jharkhand, Uttarakhand and the other separated states. Without this bifurcation, the Centre alone can make these decisions.

It is thus clear that for both demands, the Centre alone is responsible. Will it accept its duty and live up to its proclaimed commitment to ‘cooperative federalism’? Or will it continue to be beholden to vested interests and let the current crisis blow up further? Only time will tell, but I pray that prudence prevails.

B. Vinod Kumar is a member of parliament and Lok Sabha deputy floor leader of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi. He tweets at @vinodboianpalli and can be reached at vinodkumarboianapalli@yahoo.com