Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S. Sandhawalia, Vikas Suri, JJ.
Susheel Kumar & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CWP No. 6342 of 2019 (O&M)
Decided On : 10-01-2022
AUTO-CAD - Appointment to the post of Assistant Draftsman - Haryana Public Health Engineering Department, Draftsmen (Group C) Service Rules, 2011 - [Annexure P-7, Annexure P-9, Advertisement No.2 of 2011, Annexure R-1, Annexure P-4, Annexure R-3, CWP No. 1893 of 2015, CWP No. 25212 of 2014, Annexure R-5, Annexure R-6] - The court discussed the essential qualifications for the post of Assistant Draftsman as per the Service Rules, the rejection of candidates for not fulfilling the qualifications, and the principle of estoppel in relation to the eligibility criteria. The court emphasized the importance of eligibility on the cut-off date and the candidates' responsibility to challenge the rules at the appropriate time.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought appointment as Assistant Draftsmen in the Public Health Engineering Department but were rejected for not fulfilling the essential qualifications. The court found that the petitioners did not have the requisite qualification of passing AUTO-CAD course from an authorized institute as per the Service Rules. The court held that the petitioners had only a right of consideration and no absolute right of appointment, especially since they were not eligible at the time of application.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were not qualified for the post as per the conditions mentioned in the Service Rules and that their right to challenge the Rules should have been exercised at the appropriate time. The court dismissed the writ petition based on the principle of estoppel and the importance of eligibility on the cut-off date.
Issues: The issues revolved around the essential qualifications for the post of Assistant Draftsman, the rejection of candidates for not fulfilling the qualifications, and the principle of estoppel in relation to the eligibility criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of eligibility on the cut-off date and the candidates' responsibility to challenge the rules at the appropriate time. The court held that the petitioners had only a right of consideration and no absolute right of appointment, especially since they were not eligible at the time of application.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
G.S.Sandhawalia, J. - The present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing orders dated 13.03.2018 (Annexure P-7) and 12.07.2014 (Annexure P-9). Similarly, prayer has also been made to quash condition of passing AUTO-CAD course from the authorized institute of software provider as per Appendix 'B' of Haryana Public Health Engineering Department, Draftsmen (Group C) Service Rules, 2011 (in short 'Service Rules'). Resultantly, the petitioners seek appointment to the post of Assistant Draftsman in the Public Health Engineering Department.
2. Respondent No.2, vide order dated 13.03.2018 (Annexure P-7), has rejected the claim after considering the same in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court. The reason, as such, is that the petitioners are not qualified for the post as per the conditions/qualifications mentioned in the Service Rules as the candidates do not fulfill the qualifications of passing AUTO-CAD course from centre authorized by the software providers. Reference has also been made to the Government decision dated 25.08.2014 whereby, it had decided to file the matter after consideration. Similarly, the order dated 12.07.2014 (Annexure P- 9) which is challenged is the noting portion in the relevant file wherein also, it was decided that the appointments could not be issued to the selected candidates against the provisions of the Service Rules and it was approved by the then Chief Minister.
3. Respondent no. 3-Haryana Staff Selection Commission (in short 'the Commission'), vide Advertisement No.2 of 2011 advertised 83 posts of Assistant Draftsmen (Civil) on 06.11.2011. The said advertisement also invited applications for other posts in separate departments and in the case of Haryana State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited (HAFED) also, one post of Draftsman was advertised. Necessarily, the essential qualifications in the advertisement were as per the Service Rules, which read thus:-
"i) Passed a recognized certificate course in Civil Draftsman conducted by State Industrial Training and Vocational Department, Haryana or any other recognized Institute by the Haryana Government.
Or
Passed three years recognized National Certificate (Theoretical) course in Civil Engineering conducted by State Board of Technical Education, Haryana or any other recognized Institute by the Haryana Government.
ii) Certified courses in AUTO Computer Aided Design (Civil), Water Computer Aided Design including 2 Dimensional and 3 Dimensional, AUTO Computer Aided Design Map 3 Dimensional /ARC INFO/ Structural Analysis and Design PRO from Authorized Training Centre of Application Software providers.
iii) Hindi/ Sanskrit upto Matric Standard or higher education."
4. The closing date for receipt of applications in the Commission office was 07.01.2012 and the conditions prescribed in the said advertisement were that merely having the prescribed essential qualifications would not entitle the candidate to be called for interview and shortlisting may be done by holding written examination or on the basis of rational criteria to be adopted by the Commission. The decision of the Commission in the matter relating to rejection and acceptance of an application, eligibility/suitability of candidates etc. also was to be binding upon the candidates. Similarly, it is provided that an application form was to be summarily rejected in the event if the candidate did not possess the requisite academic qualification on the cut off date. The photocopies of all qualifications were to be attached with application forms and candidates applying for the posts were to ensure the eligibility conditions on the last date of the applications. On verification, if the eligibility condition was not fulfilled or the information furnished was false or incorrect, the candidature was liable to be cancelled. The petitioners had accordingly a
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of eligibility on the cut-off date and the principle of estoppel in relation to the eligibility criteria for government appointments....
Candidates cannot challenge recruitment criteria after participating in the selection process, as estoppel applies. Eligibility is determined by the employer based on stated qualifications within the....
The recommended candidates had no indefeasible right to appointment when the action of the State Government was not arbitrary.
It clearly emerges that in the event the performance of ineligible candidates in the written examination, held on are taken into consideration in shortlisting the candidates for personality test/inte....
Candidates participating in a selection process cannot challenge the process or regulations post-selection, establishing a principle of acquiescence in recruitment law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
