The court can intervene if there are contradictions or non-application of mind in the committee's conclusions regarding the equivalence of qualifications.

JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The writ petitioner holds, as becomes unfolded by Annexure A-1, a diploma, from the Himachal Pradesh Takniki Shiksha Board, in the discipline, of, Electronics and communication Engineering. In pursuance thereof, he applied against the advertised post, of, J.E. (Electrical), and his application, was made from the general (BPL category), wheretowhom, some of the advertised post(s), became reserved. However, through Annexure A-4, the petitioner became communicated, that his candidature, warrants rejection, as, it has become pronounced, by, the Apex Board, that the afore diploma, in Electronics and Communications, is, unbefitting for empowering, the petitioner to seek his becoming, considered for selection and appointment, against the advertised post, of, J.E. (Electrical), (a) and, nor it satiates the essential qualification, as becomes borne in the apposite Recruitment and Promotion Rules, wherein, a prescription occurs, inasmuch as, the aspirants' holding a diploma/degree, in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering, from, an institution, recognized by the State Government/Central Government. Since, the juxtaposing Anneuxre A-1, wherethrough, the writ petitioner, is, displayed to obtain a diploma, in Electronics and Communication Engineering, vis--vis, the afore alluded imperative essential qualification, hence prescribed in the apposite Recruitment and Promotion Rules, embodied in Annexure-R/2-A, does, reveal qua rather Annexure A-1, prima-facie, making departure(s) or deviation(s) therefrom, (b) inasmuch as, therein, the aspirants concerned, being enjoined to possess a diploma/degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering, from an institution, recognized by the State Government or Central Government, (c) whereas, with the apposite diploma, embodied in Annexure A-1, rather unfolding qua therein(s) depictions occurring that in addition to, the enjoined discipline, of Electronics, his also during the apposite course, of, his completing, the tenure, of, his studies, hence receiving instructions, in the discipline, of, Communication Engineering, thereupon, prima-facie, the cancellation, of, the candidature of the writ petitioner, for the afore post, does, hold an iota, of, validity.

2. Dehors, the afore, during the pendency, of, original application, bearing No. 2117 of 2016, an order, of, 13.1.2017, became rendered by the learned earstwhile H.P. State Administrate Tribunal, (i) where through, the fitness, or suitability of, the writ petitioner, to apply against the advertised post, and/or, vis--vis, the afore echoing(s), made in Annexure A-1, being construable, to, be co-equal, to, the prescribed educational criteria, became pronounced, to, be referred, to the Equivalence Committee. However, the afore order, became challenged by the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission, through, its constituting CWP No. 422 of 2017, and thereon on 12.7.2018, a decision was made, wherein a direction was made, upon, the learned erstwhile H.P. Administrative Tribunal, to, after considering the report, of, the Equivalence Committee, and, after affording an opportunity, to all the parties, its making a decision, on merits, upon the lis, borne in CWPOA No. 36 of 2019. The learned counsel for the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission, submits before this Court, that the report of the Equivalence Committee, borne in Annexure A-6, when in the concluding paragraph thereof, makes a declaration, that the educational qualification, possessed by the writ petitioner, and as became embodied in Annexure A-1, is, un-befitting, for, the advertised post, (ii) thereupon(s), it cannot be treated, as, an appropriate qualification, for the post, of, Junior Engineer (Electrical), (iii) and, hence sanctity, is, enjoined to be meted thereto. In making the afore submission, appertaining to this Court, becoming barred to make, an, independent, from the afore conclusion, hence judicial review, of, the afore, he