HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court upheld a decision mandating candidates appearing for Telangana state judicial services to be conversant in the Telugu language. The court was not inclined to give parity to Urdu language as an option to Telugu.
A division bench comprising Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao rejected the request for directions to the government to treat Urdu as an option for Telugu language. The court made it clear that it was in the wisdom of the state government to choose to impose such a condition for a more efficient administration.
The bench was dealing with a petition filed by Mohd Shujath Hussain, who challenged the constitutionality of Rules 5.3 and 7(i) of the Telangana State Judicial (Service and Cadre) Rules, 2023 (impugned Rules), which were brought into force through GO Ms. No. 36 (10.06.2023), which makes it obligatory for the candidates to be conversant in Telugu language and competent at translation from English to Telugu and vice-versa.
Hussain challenged the preference for Telugu language. His contention was that Urdu was an integral part of the culture and ethos of the state, which has always recognised itself as a bilingual state warranting equal recognition to both Telugu and Urdu.
Senior counsel Harender Pershad, appearing for the recruitment of judicial services, opposed the petition and submitted that Telugu was the first language of at least 77 per cent of the population of Telangana, and was therefore predominantly used. Further, he submitted that civil judges are required to rely on documentary evidence, which is majorly written in Telugu.
In this backdrop, the use of Telugu language in the judicial process was not just preferable, but also essential for proper administration and dispensation of justice. This decision of requirement of proficiency in Telugu is taken as a policy decision, he pointed out. He also brought to the notice of the court that passing the Telugu test was an essential requirement up to 2007.
Considering the contentions of senior counsel, the High Court was not inclined to interfere with the service rules.
