The court upheld that employers could set qualification requirements for recruitment, confirming that restricting eligibility to holders of unrestricted competency certificates was lawful under the statutory framework.

JUDGMENT :

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.

Since both the Writ Petitions involve common issue with similar prayer, both the matters were heard analogously and disposed of by the present common order.

2. Both the Writ Petitions have been filed inter alia with the following prayer:-

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to admit the Writ Petition and after hearing the parties further be pleased to issue appropriate Writ(s)/ Order(s):-

(1) To quash and set-aside the condition mentioned in Eligibility/ Essential qualification provided under clause 2 of the Advertisement being Advertisement No. Ref. No. MCL/HQ/Recruitment/Statutory/2022/600 dated 15.12.2022 issued by Mahanadi Coalfield Limited under Annexure-1 whereby and where under the candidates possessing restricted competency Certificates have been declared not eligible for appearing in the selection process for recruitment to the various posts of Jr. Overman T&S Gr-C (82 vacancies), Mining Sirdar T&S Gr-C (145 vacancies) and Surveyor T&S Gr-B (68 vacancies) which is wholly arbitrary, unreasonable, whimsical and without application of mind and in complete violation of the Coal Mines Regulation, 2017 and Cadre Scheme for Mining Supervisory Personnel (Cadre Scheme No. 4) published by Joint Bi-Partite Committee for the Coal Industry dated 28.03.1994.

AND

(II) Further be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 5 to accept the examination form from the candidates possessing restricted competency certificate and allow them to appear in the said examination, holding the said advertisement is illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional.

AND

(III) Further be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to provide and accept Hard Copy of the Form/Application to be filled under Advertisement No. Ref. No.: MCL/HQ/Recruitment/Statutory/ 2022/600 dated 15.12.2022 subject to the outcome of the instant case.

AND/OR

(IV) Pass such other order(s) as may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of Justice. And for this act of kindness, the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that advertisement was issued by the authorities of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited (in short MCL) on 15.12.2022 under Annexure-1, inviting applications to fill up the posts of Junior Overman (T & S), Mining Sirdar (T & S) Group-C and surveyor (T & S) Group-B. It is contended that since in the impugned advertisement so issued under Annexure-1, vide Clause-2, while prescribing the minimum qualification required for the aforesaid posts, a requirement was made that valid mining certificate of competency (Unrestricted) so issued by the Director General of Mines Safety is required to be produced, the present Writ Petitions were filed challenging such stipulation made in the impugned advertisement.

3.1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that this Court while issuing notice of the matter vide order dated 17.02.2023, passed an interim order holding that process of selection pursuant to Annexure-1 shall continue, but no final decision shall be taken without leave of the Court. However such interim order passed on 17.02.2023 was modified after appearance of Opp. Party-MCL vide order dated 13.07.2023. As per the said order this Court clarified that out of the 100 posts advertised for the post of Mining Sirdar (T & S) Group-C, 44 posts in W.P.(C) No 4690 of 2023 and 10 numbers of posts in W.P.(C) No 24192 of 2023 shall not be filled up till the next date. It is further contended that such interim order passed on 13.07.2023 is still in force. 3.2. While assailing the stipulation so contained in the advertisement with regard to production of the certificate of competency (Unrestricted) vide Clause-2, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that such a stipulation made in the advertisement is illegal and contrary to the provisions contained under Regulation 247 of the Coal