1. Recruitment for Food Safety Officers — Dispute over educational qualification — Interpretation of term degree for candidates holding post-graduate degrees in specified subjects. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 510
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Chandra Shekhar Singh and Others – Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No(s). 10389 of 2024
Decided On : 20-03-2025
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Anup Kumar, AOR Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Adv. Ms. Shruti Singh, Adv. Ms. Pragya Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Awanish Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Neha Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Shivam Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. Parth Shekhar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Singh, Adv. Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Anup Kumar, AOR Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Adv. Ms. Shruti Singh, Adv. Ms. Pragya Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Awanish Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Neha Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Shivam Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. Parth Shekhar, Adv. Mr. Shubham Singh, Adv. Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Appointment as Food Safety Officers – Candidates who possessed post-graduate degrees in subjects covered under Clause 2.1.3 of FSS Rules, are qualified for post of FSO – FSS Act does not permit State Government to transgress into field of prescribing qualifications for posts of FSO, which lies within exclusive domain of Central Government.
(2) Degree – Wherever word ‘degree’ is used, unless specific exclusion is provided, same would include within its scope and ambit all three, ‘Bachelor’s Degree’, ‘Master’s Degree’ and a ‘Doctorate Degree’.
Headnote:
(A) Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Sections 37, 91 and 94 – Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011 – Rule 2.1.3 – Appointment as Food Safety Officers – Appellants were possessed of Master’s degrees in Microbiology, Food Science and technology subjects – There was no ambiguity or misrepresentation by appellants regarding their educational qualification at the time of applying in subject recruitment process – Respondent-recruiting authority consciously accepted application forms of appellants and pursuant to their performance on merit, appellants were called for interview – It is at this stage that appellants were declared disqualified and were ousted from selection process on account of fact that they hold Master’s degree in different subjects whereas, as per Clause 2.1.3 of FSS Rules and subject advertisement, educational qualification of a master’s degree is only recognized in “Chemistry” subject, whereas for all other subjects, only a graduation degree would be qualifying criterion – FSS Act does not permit State Government to transgress into field of prescribing qualifications for posts of FSO, which lies within exclusive domain of Central Government. (Paras 21 and 26)
(B) Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Sections 37, 91 and 94 – Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011 – Rule 2.1.3 – Appointment as Food Safety Officers – If a candidate, having undertaken degree course in “Chemistry” subject, desires to apply for post of FSO, he must possess master’s degree in that subject – However, if a candidate has taken college education in subjects of food technology; dairy technology; biotechnology; oil technology; agricultural science; veterinary science; biochemistry or microbiology, then such a candidate would be qualified for FSO post, if he holds any one of degrees, i.e., either graduation, post-graduation or doctorate degree in any of these subjects – There is no logic or rationale behind excluding candidates having master’s or a doctorate degree in these subjects from staking a claim to post of FSO because such interpretation would be totally unjust, arbitrary and unconstitutional – Appellants, who possessed post-graduate degrees in subjects covered under Clause 2.1.3 of FSS Rules, were definitely and unquestionably qualified for post of FSO under subject advertisement – Impugned judgments rendered by Division Bench and Single Bench, holding that appellants were not qualified for post of FSO, quashed and set aside – Respondents shall create supernumerary posts to accommodate appellants – In case appellants succeed and are offered appointment, they shall not be entitled to back wages – However, they shall be entitled to all service benefits on a notional basis. (Paras 32, 34 and 35)
(C) University Grants Commission Act, 1955 – Section 22(3) – Degree – Meaning – Wherever word ‘degree’ is used, unless specific exclusion is provided, same would include within its scope and ambit all three, ‘Bachelor’s Degree’, ‘Master’s Degree’ and a ‘Doctorate Degree’. (Para 29)
Facts of the case:
Appellants have approached this Court by way of this appeal seeking direction upon respondents to consider candidature of appellants for appointment as Food Safety Officers [‘FSO’], pursuant to notification dated 7th October, 2015 issued by Jharkhand Public Service Commission upon the requisition of State of Jharkhand.
Findings of Court:
Since selected candidates were never impleaded and heard in proceedings before High Court or in this Court, appropriate direction has to be given to ensure that their seniority position is not disturbed at this belated stage. Successful candidates from amongst the appellants shall be placed below the last candidate selected and appointed in the subject selection process.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Judgement Key Points
Key Points: - The Food Safety and Standards Act does not permit the State Government to prescribe qualifications for Food Safety Officers; this power lies exclusively with the Central Government (!) (!) . - Candidates possessing Master's or Doctorate degrees in subjects such as Food Technology, Microbiology, or Biochemistry are qualified for the post of Food Safety Officer, not just those with Bachelor's degrees (!) . - The term 'degree' includes Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctorate degrees unless a specific exclusion is provided in the statute or rules (!) . - A candidate must hold a Master's degree specifically in Chemistry to qualify, whereas for other listed subjects, any degree (Graduation, Post-graduation, or Doctorate) is sufficient (!) . - The Supreme Court quashed the High Court judgments that disqualified appellants holding post-graduate degrees in relevant subjects (!) . - The Court directed respondents to create supernumerary posts for successful appellants without disturbing the seniority of candidates already selected (!) . - Successful appointees from this appeal are not entitled to back wages but are entitled to service benefits on a notional basis (!) . - The 2022 amendment to the Food Safety and Standards Rules explicitly clarifies that Bachelor's, Master's, or Doctorate degrees in specified subjects are valid qualifications (!) .
What is the exclusive domain regarding the prescription of qualifications for Food Safety Officers under the Food Safety and Standards Act?
What are the rights of candidates holding Master's or Doctorate degrees in subjects like Microbiology or Food Technology regarding appointment as Food Safety Officers?
What is the legal interpretation of the term 'degree' when used in recruitment advertisements under the University Grants Commission Act?
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative law
- constitutional law
- statutory interpretation
Table of Contents
2. Whether the term degree excludes post-graduate qualifications in specified subjects — Exclusive power of Central Government to prescribe qualifications under the Food Safety and Standards Act. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18 )
3. Central Government holds exclusive authority to prescribe FSO qualifications — Term degree encompasses Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctorate degrees per the UGC Act. (Para 21 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 29 , 31 , 32 )
4. The term degree, unless specifically restricted, includes Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctorate degrees; higher qualifications in a prescribed subject do not render a candidate ineligible. (Para 29 , 32 )
5. Appeal allowed — Impugned judgments set aside — Appellants permitted to participate in interviews with notional service benefits and seniority placed below previously selected candidates. (Para 34 , 35 )
6. Who has the authority to prescribe qualifications for Food Safety Officers?
Under Sections 37 and 91 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, the power to prescribe educational qualifications for Food Safety Officers lies exclusively with the Central Government. State Governments are limited to formulating modalities for carrying out assigned functions and duties. (Para 23 , 25 , 26 )
7. How should the term degree be interpreted in recruitment qualifications?
Pursuant to Section 22(3) of the UGC Act, the term degree includes Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctorate degrees. Unless a specific exclusion is provided, any of these three degrees in the required subject satisfies the qualification criteria. (Para 29 , 31 , 32 )
8. Does possessing a higher degree disqualify a candidate when a basic degree is prescribed?
No. A candidate possessing a higher degree in the prescribed subject cannot be disqualified for not possessing the basic degree, as such an interpretation would be unjust, arbitrary, and unconstitutional. (Para 32 , 34 )
JUDGMENT :
Mehta, J.
1. Heard.
2. The appellants have approached this Court by way of this appeal seeking a direction upon the respondents to consider the candidature of the appellants for appointment as Food Safety Officers1[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘FSO’], pursuant to the notification dated 7th October, 2015 issued by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission2[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘JPSC’] upon the requisition of the State of Jharkhand.
3. The appellants herein have the qualifications of post-graduation in science with microbiology, food and technology subjects. They applied for the post of FSO in pursuance of the Advertisement No. 01/20163[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘subject advertisement’] issued by the JPSC wherein the educational qualification for the said post was stipulated in the terms below: -
“A Degree in Food Technology or Dairy Technology or Biotechnology or Oil Technology or Agriculture Science or Veterinary Sciences or Biochemistry or Microbiology or Master Degree in Chemistry or Degree in Medicine from a Recognized University.”
4. The appellants were declared successful in the written examination and were called for interviews by JPSC, however, during the course of recruitment process, they were disqualified on the ground that the Master’s degree possessed by the appellants could not be treated as a valid educational qualification for the purpose of selection to the post of FSO in the State of Jharkhand.
5. Being aggrieved, the appellants invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court of Jharkhand4[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘High Court’] seeking a mandate to the concerned authorities to conduct the interview of the appellants and to declare the result. A prayer was also made to direct the respondents to accept the Master’s degree held by the appellants as a valid qualification for appointment to the post of FSO, in pursuance to the subject advertisement. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition by order dated 30th June, 2020.
6. Being aggrieved, the appellants preferred an intra court appeal5[LPA No. 244 of 2020] to the Division Bench of the High Court. In the said appeal, respondent No.8-University Grants Commission6[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘UGC’] filed a counter affidavit in the said proceedings affirming that ‘degree’ would include any degree in the specified subjects, either Bachelor’s or Master’s. Thereafter, a supplementary affidavit came to be filed by the UGC, wherein it was submitted that the degree would mean any such degree which is previously approved by the Central Government to be specified in this behalf. The Division Bench dismissed the intra- court appeal, preferred by the appellants, vide judgment dated 2nd August, 2023, holding that the appellants did not possess a degree of graduation in Food Technology; Dairy Technology; Biotechnology; Oil Technology; Agriculture Science; Veterinary Sciences; Biochemistry or Microbiology in terms of the subject advertisement and that the degrees of post-graduation held by the appellants in the fields of Microbiology/Food Science and Technology would not meet the qualification criteria in terms of the subject advertisement. The aforesaid judgment of the High Court in the intra-court appeal is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal by special leave.
Submission on behalf of the appellants: -
7. Learned counsel, appearing for the appellants, vehemently and fervently submitted that in the subject advertisement, the eligibility criterion stipulated was that the candidate should hold a degree in Food Technology or Dairy Technology or Biotechnology or Oil Technology or Agriculture Science or Veterinary Sciences or Biochemistry or Microbiology. In addition, it was also provided, in the subject advertisement, that the candidates having Master’s degree in Chemistry or degree in medicine from a recognized University would also be qualified to vie for the post.
8. Learned counsel further urged that the term ‘degree’ as
