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

2021 Supreme(Raj) 202

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SANGEET LODHA, MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, JJ.
Dr. Shilpa Sharma D/o. Shri B.M. Sharma - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through Addl. Chief Secretary, Higher Education, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur & Ors. - Respondents
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1149 of 2019 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10962 of 2018
Decided On : 27-08-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri Rajendra Prasad Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Shri Deepak Sharma.
For the Respondent: Shri M.F. Baig, Shri Avinash Choudhary for Shri V.B. Sharma, AAG through VC.

Point of Law: a candidate for recruitment to any post must possess the requisite qualification statutorily prescribed and the Court exercising the power of judicial review cannot expand upon the ambit of prescribed qualification.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code,1908 - Order 41 Rule 27 - Rajasthan Education Service (Collegiate Branch) Rules, 1986 - Rule 10(a) – Appointment of post Lecturers - Petitioner applied seeking appointment as Lecturer (Botany) but, her candidature was rejected by RPSC vide order as she did not possess Masters' degree in relevant subject - She assailed rejection of her candidature by way of a writ petition stating therein that she has Masters' degree in Microbiology which is part of Botany subject and hence, she was eligible for appointment as Lecturer (Botany) - Writ petition came to be dismissed by learned Single Judge holding that Microbiology and Botany are two distinct subjects and issue of equivalence of two different degrees is within domain of expert academic body in which Court cannot interfere –

Finding of the Court:

prescription of qualifications for a post is a matter of recruitment policy. - State as employer is entitled to prescribe qualifications as a condition of eligibility.- It is no part of role or function of judicial review to expand upon ambit of prescribed qualifications holder of an ITI certification can obtain lateral entry to diploma course - Point of matter, however, is that none of appellants fit description of candidates who had secured an ITI certification before seeking a lateral entry to a diploma course - Plainly, when an ITI with matric is required, a person who does not hold that qualification is not eligible law laid down by - Hon'ble Supreme Court in (supra requisite qualification statutorily prescribed and Court exercising power of judicial review cannot expand upon ambit of prescribed qualification - Equivalence of qualification is in exclusive domain of recruiting authorityIn backdrop of aforesaid settled legal principles of law, Court does not find any error in judgement warranting any interference in its intra court appellate jurisdiction –

Result: Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT :

Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.

1. This intra court appeal is directed against the order dated 3.7.2019 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant assailing the legality of the order dated 11.4.2018 rejecting her candidature for appointment on the post of Lecturer (Botany).

2. The facts in brief are that the respondent no.3, the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for brevity-'the RPSC') vide advertisement dated 12.1.2015 invited applications for appointment on the post of Lecturers in various subjects including the Botany in College, Education Department, Rajasthan under Rajasthan Education Service (Collegiate Branch) Rules, 1986. The minimum qualification for the aforesaid post inter alia provided for Masters' degree in relevant subject. The petitioner applied seeking appointment as Lecturer (Botany); but, her candidature was rejected by the RPSC vide order dated 11.4.2018 as she did not possess the Masters' degree in the relevant subject. She assailed rejection of her candidature by way of a writ petition stating therein that she has Masters' degree in Microbiology which is part of Botany subject and hence, she was eligible for appointment as Lecturer (Botany). The writ petition came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge holding that the Microbiology and Botany are two distinct subjects and the issue of equivalence of two different degrees is within the domain of the expert academic body in which Court cannot interfere.

3. Assailing the order dated 3.7.2019, learned senior counsel for the appellant contended that Microbiology is part of Botany subject and is being taught by the Teachers having post graduation degree in Botany. Learned senior counsel submitted that Botany was one of the additional subjects in her undergraduate (B.Sc.) degree and she has done Doctorate of Philosophy in the Botany subject from the University of Rajasthan. Drawing attention of the court towards advertisement dated 12.12.2017 issued by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission, the learned senior counsel contended that, therein, it was prescribed that Microbiology is an allied subject of the subject Botany. He submitted that the University Grants Commission vide notification dated 18.7.2018 provided for Regulations on minimum qualifications for appointment of Teachers and other academic staff in Universities and Colleges wherein a candidate having a Masters degree in a concerned/relevant/allied subject is eligible for appointment as Assistant Professor. Learned senior counsel submitted that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that an expert body of the State Government in its meeting dated 9.10.2016, while considering the question of equivalence of degree/syllabus to assess eligibility for appointment on the post of School Lecturer, recommended the degree in Microbiology to be relevant to Biology faculty for appointment.

4. Learned senior counsel further submitted that the eligibility criteria as prescribed by the RPSC requires Masters degree in the relevant subject and since the Microbiology is a relevant subject to the subject Botany, the appellant had requisite eligibility. He, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be quashed and the writ petition be allowed.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-RPSC submitted that the learned Single Judge has committed no error in dismissing the writ petition as appellant did not possess the requisite post graduation degree in Botany, the minimum eligibility criteria for appointment on the post of Lecturer (Botany). He submitted that in the writ petition bearing no.6573/2015 involving identical controversy, in pursuance of direction of the Hon'ble High Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur, an expert body was constituted which, in its meeting dated 12.4.2017, after scrutinising the syllabus of post graduate course of the respective subjects, arrived at conclusion that similarity in between the PG courses of Microbiology

      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