Hon’ble Rakesh Srivastava, J.—On 3.9.2013, the Electricity Service Commission, U.P. Power Corporation Ltd., Lucknow (for short ‘Commission’) issued an advertisement inviting applications for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) in Electrical, Electronics, Computer Science Engg./Information Technology and Civil Engineering Branches in the U.P. Power Corporation Ltd., Lucknow (for short ‘Corporation’). The last date for submission of online applications was 10.10.2013. Condition No. 4 (c) of the advertisement dated 2.9.2013 which provided for minimum cut off marks in the qualifying examination as an eligibility criterion to participate in the recruitment process was struck down by this Court at Allahabad. Accordingly, on 15.10.2013 a corrigendum was issued whereby condition No. 4 (c) in the advertisement dated 2.9.2013 was deleted. The last date for submission of online applications was extended up to 2.11.2003.

2. A perusal of the advertisement dated 2.9.2013 would show that inter alia 120 posts of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) Electrical were advertised. As per the said advertisement, only the candidates possessing a B. Tech degree in Electrical Engineering from a University or a course recognized as equivalent thereto by the State Government, were eligible for appointment to the said post.

3. The petitioners who hold a B. Tech degree in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from different Engineering Colleges also submitted their applications online for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) Electrical, the post with which we are concerned in the present writ petition. The petitioners were issued call letters and in pursuance thereof, the petitioners appeared in the Computer Based Test (CBT). On 18.12.2013, the result of CBT was declared but the name of the petitioners did not figure in the list of the successful candidates. On enquiry the petitioners came to know that their candidature was not considered, as according to the respondents the petitioners did not possess the degree of B. Tech in Electrical Engineering which made them ineligible for appointment to the post in question. After having failed to get any response to the representations made by the petitioners to the authorities concerned, the petitioners preferred the writ petitions mentioned above. The advertisement dated 3.9.2013 is not under challenge. The petitioners have only prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to treat the B. Tech degree in Electrical and Electronics Engineering possessed by them as equivalent to the B. Tech degree in Electrical Engineering, and to consider their candidature.

4. All the writ petitions mentioned above raise a common question of fact and law and as such they are being disposed of by a common order.

5. Sri Nirankar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 32 (S/B) of 2014 has made the following submissions :

a. Since the online applications of the petitioners were accepted and the petitioners were permitted to appear in the written examination, the opposite parties were estopped from withholding their result on the ground that the petitioners were not eligible.

b. The High Court at Delhi has held that the B. Tech degree in Electrical and Electronics Engineering is equivalent to the B. Tech degree in Electrical Engineering and in this view of the matter alone the opposite parties were obliged to consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment to the post in question.

c. In the year 2011, the candidates possessing the B. Tech degree in Electrical and Electronics were considered and appointed to the post of Assistant Engineer (Trainee) Electrical even though the qualification for appointment to the said post was the same as the one mentioned in the advertisement dated 3.9.2013 and as such the opposite parties should not and cannot refuse to consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment on the post in question.

6. Sri Vivek Srivasta