ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT CHANDRACHUD, C.J. AND YASHWANT VARMA, J.
RANDHIR SINGH ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS .....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 33392 of 2015, decided on 1st July, 2015)
By the Court.—The petitioner has challenged the qualifications prescribed by Government Order dated 25 December 2014 for appointment to the post of Short-term Instructor (Horticulture and Food Preservation). The educational qualifications prescribed are B.Sc Agriculture together with a diploma in Food Preservation. The contention of the petitioner is that he holds an M. Sc degree in Horticulture and that the syllabus covers the area of Food Preservation.
2. Prescribing the qualifications for a post is the function of the appointing authority. Ordinarily, the Court cannot determine the issue of equivalence or stipulate that qualifications for the effective discharge of duties of a post can be equally met by another suitable qualification. The State which fills up a post is entitled to prescribe such qualifications as it considers necessary and proper for the proper discharge of the duties attached to the post. These are not matters on which judicial review can be exercised. The Court may interfere only in those cases where the qualifications prescribed are ultra vires a legislative enactment or where it is demonstrated that the prescribed qualifications are extraneous to the duties and functions attached to the post. Such is not the case here.
3. In these circumstances, it is not proper for the Court to accept the submission of the petitioner that the qualifications which he holds should be treated as equivalent to the qualifications as prescribed. Admittedly, the petitioner did not fulfill the prescribed qualifications. Hence, we see no reason to entertain the petition.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
———————
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.