The alteration of educational qualifications post-examination violates recruitment policy and principles of fairness in public employment.

ORDER :

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:-

“A. That, the Impugned Order dated-29.01.2024 filed as Annexure-P/1& the undated Corrigendum No-01,Annexure-P/2, issued by the Respondent No-02, may kindly be quashed, with further direction to the Respondent No-02, to issued appointment order in favour of petitioner on the post of Junior Technician(Information Technology) Post Code-09.

B. That, the Respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Junior Technician (Information Technology)under the SC Category Quota, and the RespondentNo.02, may kindly be directed to issue appointment Order in favour of Petitioner.

C. Any other relief which this Hon‘ble Court may deem fit may also be kindly given to the petitioner alongwith cost and oblige.”

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite having the requisite qualification for the post of Junior Technician (Information Technology), the respondent no.1, which is a unit of Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited, has rejected his candidature vide order dated 29.1.2024 (Annexure P/1).The petitioner has also challenged the corrigendum which has been issued pursuant to the advertisement dated 22.7.2023 (Annexure P-3) issued by respondent no.1, inviting the applications for various post.

3. In brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a diploma holder in Information Technology (IT) from Government Polytechnic Ujjain, District Ujjain, which is a recognized institute. Whereas, the respondents issued an advertisement dated 22.7.2023, inter alia, for the post of Junior Technician Information Technology for which the petitioner also applied. It is further the case of the petitioner that he appeared in the aforesaid test conducted by the respondents on 24.11.2023, and was declared successful in the written examination for the post of Junior Technician (Information Technology), vide result dated 20/12/2023, and vide the letter dated 22.12.2023, the petitioner was called for the document verification on 16.1.2024.

4. However, the Respondent no.2, issued a corrigendum No.1 (Annexure P/2) after the declaration of the result of the examination, and just before the process of the document verification which was scheduled on 16.1.2024, amending the educational qualification for the post of “Junior Technician (Information Technology) for 2 posts as Essential: Full time ITI certificate recognised from NCVT/SCVT in Information Technology Trade”, and excluding the Diploma holders from the purview of the same.” Thus, the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected vide impugned order dated 29.1.2024, informing that he does not hold the requisite qualification as per the advertisement.

5. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner holds the requisite qualification as provided under the Policy for Recruitment (Annexure R-1), in which it is provided that “for the post of workman the essential qualification is Full Time I.T.I certificate in the respective trade whereas it is also stated that it would be desirable if the candidate is a Diploma holder.

6. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that subsequent to the advertisement, a corrigendum (Annexure P-2) was also issued, whereby, the requisite desirable qualification of holding a diploma has been done away with, and it has been provided that only those persons who hold Full Time I.T.I Certificate recognized from NCVT/SCVT in Information Technology Trade would be eligible candidate. It is further submitted that the aforesaid corrigendum has been issued in violation of the recruitment policy of the respondents, despite the fact that the policy was binding on respondent no.2. Thus, it is submitted that the aforesaid amendment has been made in the advertisement which has resulted in depriving the petitioner of his right to claim the candidature.

7. Counsel for the petitioner has also