The court ruled that the restructuring of the Acharya degree as equivalent to M.A. Sanskrit must be recognized in recruitment criteria for the post of Religious Teacher Junior Commissioned Officer.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH MATHUR, J.

1. Heard Mr. Aakar Srivastava learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Shivangi Verma Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Varun Pandey learned counsel for opposite parties.

2. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authority to reconsider petitioner's candidature for recruitment on the post of RTJCO and conduct a fair evaluation with regard to his qualification.

3. It is submitted that an advertisement for recruitment on the aforesaid post was issued in recruitment year 2023-24 in which petitioner applied for the post of Religious Teacher Junior Commissioned Officer (RTJCO). He successfully cleared the written examination whereafter he also qualified the physical endurance test as well as other medical criteria.

4. It is submitted that educational qualification required for the said post has been indicated in the advertisement as RT Pandit and Pandit (Gorkha) for Gorkha Regiment Hindu candidate with Shastri/Acharya in Sanskrit from UGC recognized university. In addition, it was prescribed that an individual should have a qualification of 'Karm kand' as one of the main/course subjects during Shastri/Acharya or one year diploma in 'Karm kand'.

5. It is submitted that petitioner possesses a diploma in 'Karm kand' but his candidature has apparently not been considered in view of the fact that opposite parties do not admit any equivalence of a degree of M.A. Sanskrit, which is the qualification of petitioner, with the degree of Shastri/Acharya in Sanskrit.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner has adverted to a notification dated 5th July 2014 published in Gazette of India issued by University Grants Commission regarding specification of degrees. It is submitted that the broad discipline- wise nomenclatures of degrees at all levels of higher education has thereafter been restructured with effect from the date of notification as required to be issued by universities governed by UGC regulations. He has specifically adverted to item 120 of the aforesaid notification to indicate that the degree of Acharya has been restructured as a Master's degree in Sanskrit.

7. Learned counsel has also placed reliance on a judgment rendered by Supreme Court in the case of Rampalit Vyakaran Acharya and others versus Punjab University Chandigar and another, AIR 1975 Supreme Court 2478 to buttress his submission that the aforesaid judgment has placed reliance on notification dated 23rd January 1964 issued by Government of India indicating equivalence of the degree of Acharya with M.A. in Sanskrit.

8. Learned counsel for opposite parties on the basis of counter-affidavit has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with submission that it is manifestly evident that petitioner does not possess requisite educational qualification prescribed for the post of RTJCO since admittedly he holds the degree of M.A. in Sanskrit along with diploma in Karm Kand, which is neither equivalent nor permissible substitute to the qualification of Shashtri/Acharya in Sanskrit. Learned counsel also submits that qualifications prescribed in an advertisement are sacrosanct and the notification dated 5th July 2014 in fact does not grant any equivalence of the degree of Acharya with that of M.A. in Sanskrit since the aforesaid restructuring is with regard to Sanskrit-sounding degrees.

9. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on judgments rendered by Supreme Court in the case of Shifana P.S. versus State of Kerala and Others, Civil Appeal No. 4468 of 2013; Zahoor Ahmad Rather and others versus Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmed and others, Civil Appeal No. 11853-11854 of 2018