Back
2007 Supreme(Pat) 1611
PATNA HIGH COURT
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.
Nutan Kumari
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5947 of 2007 ;
Decided On : OCTOBER 1, 2007
The experience requirement in an advertisement refers to experience acquired after obtaining the necessary qualifications and not before obtaining such qualifications.
Headnote:
Advertisement Interpretation - Eligibility Criteria - The court interpreted the advertisement's minimum qualification requirement and ruled that the experience of five years mentioned in the advertisement referred to experience acquired after the acquisition of a bachelor's degree and not prior to it, based on the precedent set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Indian Airlines Ltd. vs. S. Gopalakrishnan, (2001)2 SCC 362.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners applied for the post of Assistant Programme Officer based on an advertisement. They were called for counseling but not offered the final appointment, claiming it was in conflict with the advertisement's terms and conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the writ application, stating that the advertisement's minimum qualification requirement meant acquiring experience after obtaining the necessary qualifications and not before obtaining such qualifications.
Issues: Dispute over interpretation of the advertisement's minimum qualification requirement and eligibility for appointment based on prior experience.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the precedent set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Indian Airlines Ltd. vs. S. Gopalakrishnan, (2001)2 SCC 362, which held that experience prescribed in addition to the qualification meant acquiring experience after obtaining the necessary qualifications and not before obtaining such qualifications.
Final Decision: The writ application was dismissed as having no merit.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The dispute is very limited in the present writ application. The two petitioners were applicant for appointment to the post of Assistant Programme Officer in terms of an advertisement issued in the Employment News dated 11-17 February, 2006. Petitioners were called for counselling based on their application and declaration of experience but when it came down to final appointment the same was not offered to them. This according to the petitioners is in conflict with the terms and conditions of the advertisement.
3. The post code of which the petitioners are aspirants is P-06. It lays down that the minimum qualification shall be bachelors degree with 50% marks and having minimum five years experience in the field of primary and adult education. This experience has been further explained in later part of the advertisement. Petitioners case is that they are graduate and they have five years of experience but this experience is prior to acquisition of their bachelors degree. In that view of the matter, they are very much eligible to be appointed.
4. The stand on behalf of the respondents is that the advertisement with regard to the minimum qualification cannot be interpreted to mean that a person who has acquired experience even prior to acquiring a bachelors degree would meet the requirements of the advertisement. The advertisement is very clear that the experience of five years talks about experience acquired after the bachelors degrees acquisition and not prior to the same. In this regard reliance is being placed upon a decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Indian Airlines Ltd. vs. S. Gopalakrishnan, (2001)2 SCC 362. The Hon ble Supreme Court while dealing with a similar matter had held that when in addition to the qualification experience is prescribed, it would only mean acquiring experience after obtaining the necessary qualifications and not before obtaining such qualification. If this is the law then the respondents have committed no wrong in not treating the past experience of these petitioners prior to acquisition of their bachelors degree.
5. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed as having no merit.
