Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, SUBHASH UPADHYAY
Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.
1. These intra-court appeals are directed against the judgment dated 25.08.2025 rendered by learned Single Judge in WPSS No.2511/2024 and connected matters, whereby the writ petitions filed by the appellants, seeking a mandamus to allow them to appear in the selection for appointment as Pharmacist in Labour Department, was dismissed.
2. As per the applicable Rules, a candidate must possess Diploma in Pharmacy for appointment as Pharmacist in ESI Corporation run hospitals. Admittedly, appellants-writ petitioners possessed Bachelor’s Degree in Pharmacy (B. Pharma) and thus they do not meet the eligibility condition as mentioned in the Rules. Appellants-writ petitioners argued before the learned Single Judge that since B. Pharma is a higher qualification than Diploma in Pharmacy, therefore, right to be considered for appointment cannot be denied to them and their candidature has to be accepted for appointment as Pharmacist.
3. Learned Single Judge by relying upon a judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zahoor Ahmed Rather and others v. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad and others, (2019) 2 SCC 307 held that merely by possessing a qualification whic
(1) Appointment of Pharmacists – Prescription of eligibility criteria of 10+2 with Diploma in Pharmacy by State cannot be said to be arbitrary or irrational – Rule 6(1) is Constitutionally valid.(2) ....
Recruitment Rules cannot be at variance with the Regulations prescribed by the Pharmacy Council of India for essential qualifications for appointment as a Pharmacist.
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
