HC Rejects Plea To Review History Paper-II Results
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court dismissed the writ plea challenging the interim order regarding consideration of History Paper-II in Telangana Eligibility Test (TGSET) 2024.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin refused to interfere with the single judge’s order dated November 12, 2025. The earlier decision refused to withhold exam results or create an expert committee to re-examine allegedly flawed questions.
TGSET exam was held on September 10, 2024, following the notification made on May 4, 2024. The preliminary answer key was released on September 23, 2024, and candidates were allowed to submit objections between October 3 and October 11, 2024. After the objections were reviewed by the subject expert committee, the answer key was finalized and the results were announced on November 16, 2024.
The appellants, including Vontari Sharanya, filed representations on November 28, 2024, December 2, 2024, February 8, 2025 and August 21, 2025, alleging that some questions in History Paper-II were erroneous.
According to the appellants, the expert committee had awarded compensation marks to 25 incorrect questions but ignored the other 14 allegedly incorrect questions.
They asked for instructions to give make-up marks to the candidates who took the exam for all 39 questions that were allegedly defective. Alternatively, they demanded that the History Paper-II exam be canceled and a new test be conducted.
The writ petition challenging the evaluation process was filed on September 15, 2025, nearly a year after the results were announced. After the single judge refused to preserve the results in the interim proceedings, the petitioners approached the Division Bench.
The bench noted that the main writ petition was pending before the court and the results had already been published in line with the recommendations of the Subject Matter Experts Committee.
Referring to the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Surjeet Singh Sahni v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ran Vijay Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the court observed that judicial intervention in academic matters involving expert assessment should be exercised with restraint.
Finding no grounds to interfere with the single judge’s interim order, the Division Bench rejected the writ appeal.
