IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.
Barot Chiragkumar Rameshbhai & 1 Others – Petitioners
Versus
Gujarat Panchayat Service Selection Board & 12 Others – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 459 of 2018
Decided On : 13-12-2022
Degree Holders - Eligibility for Additional Assistant Engineer (Civil) - Rule 3b - The court examined whether a person with a degree in Civil Engineering is eligible for the post of Additional Assistant Engineer and whether their participation in the recruitment process was in accordance with the rules. The court found that the rules prescribed any equivalent educational qualification apart from diploma holders, and therefore, degree holders were rightly allowed to participate in the selection process. The petition was dismissed on the grounds of non-joinder of necessary party, delay, and the petitioners' participation in the selection process without objection.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, diploma holders in Civil Engineering, challenged the selection of degree holders for the post of Additional Assistant Engineer (Civil) based on the advertisement issued by Respondent No.1 in 2016. They argued that the selection process was defective as it did not adhere to the rules and allowed degree holders to be appointed, causing gross injustice to diploma holders.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rules prescribed any equivalent educational qualification apart from diploma holders, and therefore, degree holders were rightly allowed to participate in the selection process. The petition was dismissed on the grounds of non-joinder of necessary party, delay, and the petitioners' participation in the selection process without objection.
Issues: The main issue was whether degree holders were eligible for the post of Additional Assistant Engineer and whether their participation in the recruitment process was in accordance with the rules. The court also considered the non-joinder of necessary party and delay in filing the petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rules prescribed any equivalent educational qualification apart from diploma holders, and therefore, degree holders were rightly allowed to participate in the selection process. The petition was dismissed on the grounds of non-joinder of necessary party, delay, and the petitioners' participation in the selection process without objection.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the rule was discharged. No order as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Learned advocate Mr.D.G.Shukla waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent No.1 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Kurven Desai waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent No.2.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:
(B) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships be pleased to direct the respondents to keep 2 posts vacant for the post of Additional Assistant Engineer (Civil);
(C) Any other and such further relief as may be deemed fit just and proper may be granted in the interest of justice together with costs”
3. Heard learned advocate Mr.T.R.Mishra for the petitioners, learned advocate Mr.D.G.Shukla for Respondent No.1 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Kurven Desai for Respondent No.2.
4.1 It is the case of the petitioners that pursuant to an advertisement published by Respondent No.1 in the year 2016 for the posts of Additional Assistant Engineer (Civil), which is Class-III post, which were to be filled up by way of direct recruitment, the petitioners applied for the said posts.
4.2 Both the petitioners are diploma holders in Civil Engineering and they were fulfilling the educational criteria prescribed for being appointed for the said post. According to the petitioners, in the advertisement, more particularly Clause-3 and 3.1 refers to about age limit and educational qualification. In all, there were three educational qualifications prescribed, however, for the purpose of determining the issue on hand, what is important is the educational qualification in respect of Civil Engineering and not about basic knowledge of computer or knowledge of Gujarati and Hindi language. Aforesaid relevant educational qualification is prescribed in advertisement No.1/2016-17 for the post of Additional Assistant Engineer (Civil) produced at Annexure-A i.e. at page:19 of the petition.
4.3 The educational qualification for the post of the Additional Assistant Engineer (Civil) Class-III as per the in the superior Panchayat Service Recruitment Rules, 2014, is described in Rule 3b as under:
(a) xxx xxx
(b) possess a Diploma in Civil Engineering obtained from Technical Examination Board or any of the Universities or institutions established or incorporated by or under the Central or State Act in India; or any other educational institution recognized as such or declared as deemed to be a University under section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 or an equivalent qualification recognized by the Government.”
4.4 The grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, petitioners appeared in the examination and secured reasonably good marks, however, though the educational qualification prescribed for being appointed on the post was Diploma in Civil Engineering, the Respondent No.1 considered the persons who were having Degree in Civil Engineering and, therefore, the entire selection process is defective as the same has not been carried out strictly in accordance with the Rules and though the post was meant only for Diploma holders by considering candidatures of Degree Holders also a gross injustice has been done to the Diploma holders and had the Degree holders not been selected, the present petitioners could have found their place in the select list and could have been select
Ranjan Kumar and others vs. State of Bihar and others
Zahoor Ahmad Rather and others vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others
The court established that the eligibility criteria for the post of Junior Engineer allowed for candidates with high technical qualifications regardless of the educational channel, and that the princ....
A degree in Engineering cannot be viewed as a higher qualification compared to a Diploma in Engineering, and candidates holding degrees are excluded from consideration for positions that specifically....
The authority to determine eligibility qualifications for public posts lies solely with the State Government, and recruitment processes must adhere strictly to established service rules.
The court upheld the constitutionality of recruitment rules that limit eligibility to diploma holders, finding the exclusion of graduates justifiable for maintaining service stability and effective d....
Eligibility criteria for recruitment cannot be altered mid-process, as it undermines fairness and transparency, violating established legal principles.
Appointment on Post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) – Minimum qualification for the post cannot be deemed to be only matriculation but rather that only such of those matriculates, or 10+2 pass studen....
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 ....
The court upheld the exclusion of degree holders from recruitment rules for Additional Assistant Engineer positions, emphasizing the need for classifications in public policy to protect employment op....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.