SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Guj) 743

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
OD KAMLESHKUMAR BALDEVBHAI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & others - Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7536 of 2021
Decided On : 26-08-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant : MR BH KHER, MR VIRAT G POPAT
For The Respondent: MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, AGP, MR DIPAK R DAVE

Point of Law: It is the legal or executive policy of the Government to create post or to prescribe the qualification for the post. The Court or Tribunal is devoid of power to give such direction.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 – Article 226 – Recruitment - Verification of documents - Learned advocate submitted that petitioner is holding degree of Bachelor of Rural Science - It was submitted that petitioner applied for post of Vidyut pursuant to advertisement issued by respondent and appeared for computer based test and thereafter petitioner was called for verification of documents - Respondent vide communication disqualified petitioner on ground that petitioner is not holding qualification as prescribed in advertisement as petitioner is not holding either degree of full time graduate in course of B.A., B.Com, B.Sc., B.C.A and B.B.A in regular mode from any recognized University duly approved by UGC as petitioner is holding the degree of BRS - It is the case of petitioners that petitioners who are having qualification of engineering are barred from participating in recruitment process to post of (Junior Assistant) and educational qualification fixed under impugned communication is not a reasonable criteria to match with requirement of post - It is also contended that petitioners who are having qualification higher than qualification prescribed cannot be treated ineligible.

Finding of the Court:

Fixing of educational qualification for post of (Junior Assistant), respondents have undertaken necessary exercise and as suited to the requirement of post, educational qualification is prescribed - Contention of the petitioners that educational qualification of petitioners is higher than educational qualification prescribed for post, cannot be accepted as educational qualification prescribed for post in question is of a different stream related to Commerce and Administration, whereas educational qualification of petitioners is from Engineering stream - Court or Tribunal is devoid of power to give such direction - Relief sought by petitioners in this petitions is also seeking direction to hold that educational qualification prescribed for particular post is prayed to be set aside - This exercise in facts of the case, Court is not inclined to undertake - In view of the aforesaid, Court finds no reason to interfere with recruitment procedure especially educational qualification prescribed for the post of (Junior Assistant) which is challenged by petitioners in petitions.

Result: Petition dismissed

ORDER :

Heard learned advocate Mr.Virat G. Popat for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Dhawan Jayswal for the respondent- State and learned advocate Mr.Dipak R. Dave for the respondent No.2.

1. This Court passed the following order on 27th July, 2021 :

    “Heard learned advocate Mr.Virat Popat for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Dhawan Jayswal for the respondent-State through video conference.

1. Learned advocate Mr.Popat seeks permission to delete respondent No.1-State Government. Permission is granted. Cause title be amended accordingly.

2. Learned advocate Mr.Popat submitted that the petitioner is holding the degree of Bachelor of Rural Science. It was submitted that the petitioner applied for the post of Vidyut Sahayak pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondent No.2 and appeared for computer based test and thereafter the petitioner was called for verification of the documents. The respondent No.2 vide communication dated 8th / 9th April, 2021 disqualified the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is not holding the qualification as prescribed in the advertisement as petitioner is not holding either degree of full time graduate in course of B.A., B.Com, B.Sc., B.C.A and B.B.A in regular mode from any recognized University duly approved by UGC as the petitioner is holding the degree of BRS.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Popat submitted that the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the decision rendered in case of Pareeliya Bharatbhai Dhudabhai Vs. State of Gujarat in Special Civil Application No.5750 of 2017 and in case of Kantaben Zaverbhai Desai Vs. State of Gujarat and Others in Special Civil Application No.1861 of 2017. It was further submitted that the case of the petitioner can be distinguished with regard to the facts of the case in case of Gujarat Public Service Commission Vs. Dhanjibhai Savjibhai Maru & Anr. rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No.550 of 2013.

4. Considering the above submissions, issue Notice for final disposal, returnable on 17th August, 2021. Direct service is permitted.”

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, at the outset, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in case of Hiteshkumar Vinodchandra Vala and Ors. Vs. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. and Ors. rendered on 14th June, 2021 in Special Civil Application NO.905 of 2020 as the facts of the case of the present petitioner are identical to that of the petitioners in the said petition. It was therefore submitted that this petition may be disposed of as dismissed as the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has not interfered with the recruitment procedure with regard to the educational qualification prescribed for the post of Vidyut Sahayak (Junior Assistant) which is challenged by the petitioners in the said petition.

3. In view of the above submissions, it would be necessary to refer to the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Hiteshkumar Vinodchandra Vala (Supra) which reads as under :

    “[1] This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners seeing direction to quash and set aside the communication dated 25.11.2019 by which qualification was prescribed for the post of Vidyut Sahayak (Junior Assistant).

[2] It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners who are having qualification of engineering are barred from participating in the recruitment process to the post of Vidyut Sahayak (Junior Assistant) and therefore, the educational qualification fixed under the impugned communication is not a reasonable criteria to match with the requirement of the post. It is also contended that the petitioners who are having qualification higher than the qualification prescribed cannot be treated ineligible.

[3] As the petitioners are raising common questions and is

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top