This notification addresses grievances raised concerning the Tentative Priority List for Group-I Services, specifically pertaining to sports quota candidates.
Overview
The document details individual grievances submitted by candidates regarding their sports participation, the genuineness of their certificates, and the subsequent findings and remarks by the committee. The process is guided by specific government orders and regulations concerning sports quota reservations.
References
The committee's decisions and findings are based on the following:
- Letter No.248/Group-1/2023, Dated: 18.06.2025 (Reference for the grievance process, though this date appears to be in the future relative to the notification date).
- G.O.Ms.No. 74 Dt. 09.08.2012, YAT & C(Sports) Dept, GoAP.
- G.O.Ms. No. 8 Dt. 23.11.2020 of YAT & C(Sports) Dept, GoAP.
- Notification No. 12/2023, Dt:08.12.2023.
Grievance Categories and Committee Findings
The grievances generally fall into several categories, with committee findings addressing each:
- Complaints Against Other Candidates: Grievances were raised against other candidates on the Tentative Priority List. The committee noted that action would be initiated based on genuineness verification from the Federation.
- Submission of Original Forms: Candidates submitted their original application forms (e.g., Form-II, Form-III). If the submission was successful and valid, priority was allotted.
- Recognition of Sports Disciplines: Initially, Ball Badminton was not recognized as a sports discipline. As per G.O.Ms.No.7 (amendment), Ball Badminton has been included as a 30th sports discipline.
- Non-Submission/Invalid Forms: Candidates failing to submit required forms or submitting invalid ones often resulted in priority not being considered.
- Genuineness of Sports Certificates: Certificates were subject to verification. If not genuine or lacking proper documentation, priority was not allotted. For instance, a certificate from JNTUK was deemed not genuine and appeared to be fake, leading to no priority.
- Participation from Other States: Individual participation from universities/organizations located in other states was generally deemed ineligible, leading to no priority allotment.
- Certificates from Unrecognized Associations: Certificates issued by unrecognized associations were not accepted. However, tournaments organized by the Association of Indian University (AIU), which is a recognized association, were considered.
- Physical Verification: Absence during physical verification led to priority not being considered.
Key Rulings and Policies
- Highest Achievements for Priority: The priority list is prepared based on the highest achievements eligible for priority (e.g., priority 72).
- 10-Year Validity Rule: As per G.O.Ms.No.8, dated 23.11.2020, sports certificates older than 10 years from the date of notification are generally considered invalid. Direct selection trials are not considered as a backup for individual and team events.
- High Court Directives: The document specifically addresses a case (related to candidate Ch.V. Pratyusha) where the Hon'ble High Court directed consideration of sports certificates prior to 10 years from the notification date. However, upon verification, the certificate was found to be older than 10 years, lacked proper backup documentation, and the issuing federation/association failed to provide documentary proof of genuineness. Consequently, no priority was assigned in this specific instance.
Conclusion
The State Level Committee will make the final decision based on these findings and established government policies. The overall process emphasizes strict adherence to government orders regarding the validity and genuineness of sports participation and certificates for priority allotment in Group-I Services.