IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Rajeev Kumar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1415, 1419 of 2019 (S/S)
Decided on : 23-09-2022
Equivalence - M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) - - The University certified M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) as equivalent to M.Sc. (Zoology). Expert Committee report supported the equivalence. State Government directed the Commission to declare the result based on the Expert Committee's finding. Court held the petitioners eligible for the post of Lecturer (Biology) based on the equivalence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) and Bachelor of Education degree holders, applied for the post of Lecturer Biology. They were initially disqualified by the Commission due to their M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) qualification. The State Government appointed an Expert Committee to determine the equivalence of M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) and M.Sc. (Zoology). The Committee reported that the two qualifications are equivalent.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Expert Committee's report supported the equivalence of M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) and M.Sc. (Zoology). The State Government directed the Commission to proceed with the selection process based on the Expert Committee's finding. The Court held the petitioners eligible for the post of Lecturer (Biology) based on the equivalence.
Issues: The main issue was the eligibility of the petitioners for the post of Lecturer (Biology) based on their M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) qualification.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the Expert Committee's report and the State Government's directive to conclude that the petitioners were eligible for the post of Lecturer (Biology) based on the equivalence of M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) and M.Sc. (Zoology).
Final Decision: The Court allowed the petitions and directed the Commission to proceed with the selection process, considering the petitioners eligible for the post of Lecturer (Biology) based on the equivalence of their M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) qualification.
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
A common question of law arises in these petitions; therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment.
2. The petitioners are M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) and also Bachelor of Education from Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, Srinagar, District Pauri Garhwal (for short, “the University”). The respondent no.2, Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (for short, “the Commission”) issued an advertisement on 04.09.2018 inviting applications for the post of Lecturer including 71 posts of Lecturer Biology. As per advertisement, the qualification for the post was as follows:-
“(i) Post Graduation Degree in Botany or Zoology from any University established by law in India.
(ii) L.T. Diploma from the Government or Government recognized Training Institute/College or Degree in Bachelor of Education from any University established by law in India.”
3. Both the petitioners applied for the said post and appeared in the Entrance Examination. Both of them qualified the Written Examination. Suddenly, it is the case of the petitioners that the Commission, on 08.06.2019, issued a list of disqualified candidates and both the petitioners have been shown disqualified on the ground that they had obtained M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology). The petitioners made their representations claiming that, in fact, M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) is a course run by the University for M.Sc. (Zoology). They are one and the same. The University certified it, but since no action was taken, hence, the petitions.
4. The petitions were taken for hearing on 25.06.2019, when this Court directed for appointment of a panel of experts on the subject to decide the controversy. The Court directed as hereunder:-
Meanwhile, selection, if any, is made pursuant to the interview held by the respondent the same shall be subject to the final decision of the writ petition.”
5. The Commission filed counter affidavit. According to the Commission, as per the relevant Rules, the qualifications for the post of Lecturer (Biology) is M.Sc. (Botany or Zoology) and L.T. Diploma from Government or Government recognized institution or degree college or B.Ed. degree from the University established by law. It’s the Commission case that since the petitioners do not possess the required qualifications, they were declared ineligible vide list dated 08.06.2019.
6. The State filed its counter affidavit. It is stated that the compliance of Court’s order dated 25.06.2019, a Committee was constituted and the Committee reported that the, “Syllabus of M.Sc. (Advance Zoology) and M.Sc. (Zoology) are 90% same as such M.Sc. (Advance Zoology) may be treated as equivalent to M.Sc. (Zoology)”. The report of the Commission has also been enclosed. According to the State, after report of the expert, the State Government has written to the Commission on 28.01.2020 to declare the result as per finding of the Expert Committee.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that pursuant to this Court’s order dated 25.06.2019, the controversy has been decided by the Expert Committee, which has opined that M.Sc. (Advanced Zoology) and M.Sc.
Ajith K. and others vs. Aneesh K.S. and others (2019)17 SCC 147
Anand Yadav and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the determination of equivalence of qualifications by an Expert Committee, supported by the State Government, can influence the eligibility of....
a candidate for recruitment to any post must possess the requisite qualification statutorily prescribed and the Court exercising the power of judicial review cannot expand upon the ambit of prescribe....
The court affirmed that specific subject qualifications are essential for teaching positions, and equivalence determinations are within the purview of expert bodies.
The relevance and equivalence of the qualification, as opined by the University of Jammu and University of Kashmir, are crucial in determining eligibility for a specific post.
The court emphasized the relevance and equivalence of the qualification possessed by the petitioners, as opined by the University of Jammu and University of Kashmir, and highlighted the importance of....
Courts have a limited role in academic matters and cannot act as an appellate authority over the decisions of expert bodies unless there is evidence of arbitrariness or mala fide.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that appointments to academic positions must adhere to the prescribed educational qualifications and regulations, and that the equivalence of degre....
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.