Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Subhash Vidyarthi JJ.
Prashant Kumar Mishra And 3 Others – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Home Deptt. Lko. And 26 Others – Respondent
SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 70 of 2025
Decided On : 11-02-2025
(A) U.P. Police Radio Subordinate Services Rules, 2015 - Rule 8-C - Recruitment process for Operators/Head Operators (Mechanical) - The Recruitment Board's resolution dated 23.04.2024 revoking eligibility for Bachelor Degree holders is arbitrary and illegal, as eligibility must be determined by the State Government. The court found that qualifications for public posts must align with the published service rules, which only recognized a 3-year Diploma as eligible. (Paras 11, 19, 37)
(B) Principles of Recruitment - It is established that the authority for determining equivalence of qualifications rests solely with the State Government, and the Recruitment Board exceeded its jurisdiction by attempting to modify eligibility criteria post-advertisement. (Paras 21, 41)
(C) Judicial Review - Courts cannot interfere with clear eligibility conditions set forth in recruitment notifications unless ambiguity exists. (Paras 36, 41)
Facts of the case:
The appellants challenged a decision by the Recruitment Board that revoked the earlier eligibility for 4-year Bachelor Degree holders for recruitment to 936 posts of Operators/Head Operators, which had been advertised on 06.01.2022. The petitioners, who held Bachelor Degrees, claimed eligibility based on a previous resolution from 2021.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the decision that Bachelor Degree holders are not eligible for the posts in question, but found the Writ Court's order to set aside the entire selection process unjustified.
Issues: The main issues included the authority of the Recruitment Board to determine eligibility and the validity of the revocation of prior resolutions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the Recruitment Board acted beyond its authority in modifying eligibility criteria and that the State Government alone has the power to determine equivalence of qualifications.
Result: The intra Court appeal is allowed, and the part of the Writ Court's judgment setting aside the selection process is set aside.
JUDGMENT
Subhash Vidyarthi, J.
1. Heard Sri J. N. Mathur, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mohd. Mansoor and Sri Mohd. Danish Advocates, the learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri Prafulla Kumar Yadav, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State/opposite parties no.1 to 4, Sri Ratnesh Chandra, the learned counsel for the opposite parties no.5 to 19 and perused the records.
2. By means of the instant intra Court appeal filed under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 the appellants have challenged the validity of a judgment and order dated 08.01.2025, passed by an Hon’ble Single Judge Bench of this Court in Writ-A No.4610 of 2024: Ravi Kumar Shukla and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, which was decided along with Writ-A No.7284 of 2024, Prabhat Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and others.
3. The aforesaid Writ Petition had been filed by 15 petitioners, who have been arrayed as opposite parties no.5 to 19 in this Special Appeal, against the appellants, who were opposite parties no.1 to 4 in the writ petition challenging the validity of a resolution passed in a meeting of the U. P. Police Recruitment and Promotion Board (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Recruitment Board’) on 23.04.2024, whereby the Recruitment Board modified its previous resolution dated 25.08.2021. The earlier resolution dated 25.08.2021 had provided that persons holding 4 years’ Bachelor Degree should also be eligible for the post of Operator/Head Operator (Mechanical) and this decision was revoked by the resolution dated 23.04.2024.
4. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the Recruitment Board had issued an advertisement dated 06.01.2022 for making direct recruitment on 936 posts of Operators/Head Operators (Mechanical). The educational qualification mentioned in the advertisement was possessing a 3 years’ Diploma in Electronics / Telecommunication / Electrical / Computer Science / Information Technology / Instrumentation Technology / Mechanical Engineering awarded by any Board in India established by law or having passed any other examination treated by the Government as equivalent thereto.
5. It appears that numerous candidates possessing Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering also applied in response to the aforesaid advertisement mentioning their qualification as diploma and they participated in the written examination. Thereafter, the Recruitment Board passed the impugned resolution dated 23.04.2024 stating that it was revoking its earlier resolution that candidates possessing 4 years’ Bachelor Degree will also be eligible for the post in question.
6. The petitioners contended that prior to issuance of the advertisement dated 06.01.2022, the Recruitment Board had taken a decision in its meeting held on 25.08.2021, whereby it was resolved that the candidates having 4 years Bachelor Degree in streams like Electronics / Telecommunication / Electrical / Computer Science / Information Technology / Instrumentation Technology / Mechanical Engineering will be eligible for selection, as they possess a higher qualification.
7. It was pleaded in the Writ Petition that a copy of the resolution dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Recruitment Board was not available with the petitioners even till filing of the Writ Petition. A candidate Vidya Sagar was stated to have submitted an application dated 01.03.2024 under the Right to Information Act and it was informed in its reply dated 03.04.2024 that in its resolution dated 25.08.2021 the Recruitment Board had decided that the candidates possessing 4 years’ Bachelor Degree will also be eligible.
8. The State filed a counter affidavit opposing the Writ Petition stating that the recruitment is being conducted under the provisions of U.P. Police Radio Subordinate Services Rules , 2015; that in the recruitment notification dated 06.01.2022 the qualification advertised was as per the provisions contained in
The authority to determine eligibility qualifications for public posts lies solely with the State Government, and recruitment processes must adhere strictly to established service rules.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment cannot be altered mid-process, as it undermines fairness and transparency, violating established legal principles.
The court upheld the constitutionality of recruitment rules limiting Junior Engineer positions to diploma holders, determining that excluding higher qualification holders does not violate constitutio....
The employer has the right to prescribe qualifications suitable for the post, and the court cannot go into the issue of correctness of qualifications prescribed.
Higher qualifications do not disqualify candidates from eligibility if the recruitment rules do not expressly prohibit them, and candidates are estopped from challenging criteria after participating ....
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
