Higher qualifications do not disqualify candidates from eligibility if the recruitment rules do not expressly prohibit them, and candidates are estopped from challenging criteria after participating in the selection process.

JUDGMENT :

(Mangesh S. Patil, J.)

Heard. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith in both the matters.

2. Learned AGP and the learned advocates for the respective respondents waive service. At the joint request of the parties, both the matters have been heard together since they are putting up a challenge to the common judgment and order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, bench at Aurangabad dated 10-05-2024 in Original Application nos. 1120 of 2023 and 145 of 2024 with Miscellaneous Application no. 87 of 2024.

3. The issue arises out of the advertisement published by the Directorate of Vocational Education and Training, dated 17-08-2022 for filling in 1457 posts of Craft Instructors in the Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) across the state, in respect of 48 different trades.

4. While publishing the advertisement, requisite educational qualification and experience was prescribed pursuant to the The Craft Instructors, Class III in Industrial Training Institutes and Basic Training and Related Instruction Centers in the Department of Technical Education (Recruitment) Rules, 1983 (hereinafter ‘Recruitment Rules of 1983’) framed by the State of Maharashtra under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The requisite qualification prescribed was Diploma in appropriate branch of Engineering. In clause no. 8.1 of the advertisement, it was stipulated that the candidates possessing higher qualification in respective trades, would be considered eligible. It is this clause, which is the bone of dispute.

5. As per clause 15.23 of the advertisement, the verification of documents of the candidates enlisted in the merit list was to take place. It contemplated publication of provisional select list as well as final selection list but no lists were ever published. It was alleged that the applicants before the tribunal were kept in dark resulting in lack of knowledge about publication of selection list. It is only after circular dated 15-01-2024 in respect of the document verification was issued, that they became aware that candidates possessing only graduation (B.E.) were held eligible, even when they were not having prescribed qualification of diploma in respective trades. It was also alleged that the stipulation in the advertisement in clause no. 8.1 was merely a declaration to the effect that higher qualification would not be treated as a disqualification but was not intended to dispense with the essential requirement or prescribed qualification of diploma in second class in respective trade. The Recruitment Rules of 1983 were not intended to be diluted. The persons who were holding merely B.E. qualification were selected ignoring that they were not possessing minimum qualification of having a diploma in the respective trade. Questioning such selection list, the petitioners from writ petition no. 5271 of 2024 filed original application no. 145 of 2024.

6. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the High Court in the matter of Milind Shantilal Rathod and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others (writ petition no. 8568 of 2022 - dated 30-01-2023).

7. The petitioners from writ petition no. 5313 of 2024 preferred the Original Application no. 1120 of 2023 and merely put up a challenge to the advertisement no. 01/2022 on the ground that the qualification mentioned in the advertisement was not as per the Recruitment Rules of 1983. They also questioned the equalization method adopted while assigning the marks.

8. The state opposed the original applications with a basic contention that clause no. 8.1 of the advertisement was not contrary to the Recruitment Rules of 1983. It declared that candidates possessing higher qualification in the related stream, would be considered eligible. The clause was never challenged by the original applicants. They participated in the process and are now putting up a challenge belatedly as an afterthought. Once having participated in the recruitment process without demur they were estopped from challenging