Higher educational qualifications do not disqualify candidates for positions requiring lower qualifications, and recruitment must follow established government policies.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. Admit. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhurve waives service of admission for and on behalf of respondent no.1, learned advocate Mr.Hardik Karathiya waives service of admission for and on behalf of respondent no.2 and learned advocate Mr. P.C. Chaudhari waives service of admission for and on behalf of respondent no.3. The matter is taken upon for final hearing today.

2. The present appeal emanates from the impugned judgment and order dated 06.12.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition, whereby, the learned Singe Judge though has recorded findings in favour of the present appellant – original petitioner, has ultimately directed the appellant to make a representation.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Nisarg Jain appearing for the appellant has submitted that the learned Single Judge ought not to have relegated the present appellant to make a representation since the reasoning recorded by the learned Single Judge is in her favour. He has submitted that after the merit list dated 06.08.2019 was prepared, a decision was taken by the Committee on 13.12.2019 not to act upon such merit list in view of the communication dated 23.02.2017 issued by the Additional Director, Women and Child Development, Gandhinagar. Thus, it is submitted that despite the name of the appellant figuring at serial no.1 of the revised merit list, she is not offered the appointment. It is also submitted that the Additional Director has no authority to act against the Government Resolution dated 13.11.2009, which lays down the requisite criteria for the appointment to the post of Aganwadi Worker and Helper.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Jain has further submitted that the only objection raised by the respondent authority is with regard to the educational qualification of the present appellant. It is submitted that the present appellant is having educational qualification of B.A., M.A, whereas minimum qualification, as required under the Government Resolution dated 13.11.2009 as per clause 1 is SSC passed. While placing reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Varnilaben Ketanbhai Vasava vs. State of Gujarat & Ors., AIR Online 2021 Guj. 1470, it is submitted that the appointment on the post of Aganwadi Worker cannot be denied to the present appellant.

5. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Karathiya appearing for the respondent no.2 has vehemently opposed the present appeal and has submitted that in fact, the appellant has suppressed the letter dated 13.12.2019 written by the Child Development Officer, Chikhali-respondent no.2 to the appellant informing her about the rejection of objection taken by her to the appointment of the respondent no.3. It is submitted that the said communication is neither disclosed in the writ petition nor assailed by the appellant. He has further submitted that the appellant is not entitled to the appointment to the post of Aganwadi Worker since she is possessing higher educational qualification than the prescribed qualification of SSC. He has referred to clause 1 and the Proviso thereto of the Government Resolution dated 13.11.2009. It is submitted by him that the Committee, which met on 13.12.2019, had taken a decision not to give effect to the merit list dated 06.08.2019 in view of the communication dated 23.02.2017 issued by the Additional Director, Women and Child Development, Gandhinagar.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has submitted that vide communication dated 23.02.2017 the Additional Director has clarified that as per the Resolution dated 13.11.2009, a candidate who possesses the minimum qualification of Standard 10 is only entitled to the appointment to the post of Aganwadi Worker. Thus, she has submitted that since the appellant is over qualified, she cannot be appointed to the aforesaid post.

7. Learned advocate Mr. P.C. Chaudhari appearing on behalf of respondent no.3 has requested that since the respondent no.3 is working for