2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1064

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mohd Altaf – Appellant
Versus
D/o Health And Medical Education Ut Of Jammu & Kashmir – Respondent
T.A./884/2020

Eligibility for a post must be strictly tested against the prescribed qualification in the advertisement; a different qualification cannot be substituted unless equivalence is established by the competent authority.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Recruitment - Essential qualification - Eligibility must be tested strictly as per recruitment notice/advertisement and prescribed qualification - A candidate not fulfilling essential eligibility cannot be appointed by treating a different qualification as sufficient, unless equivalence/recognition is established by competent authority under governing rules - Burden to justify appointment against an essential eligibility condition lies on the appointing/recruiting authority once appointment is challenged on eligibility. (Paras 22-24)

(B) Recruitment - Waiting list - A wait-listed candidate cannot demand appointment as of right in ordinary circumstances - However, where selected candidate is found ineligible ab initio, selection is vitiated insofar as that post is concerned, and process must be corrected in accordance with law - In such case, wait-listed candidate next in order of merit, if otherwise eligible, is entitled to be considered for appointment, subject to satisfaction of eligibility and availability of vacancy. (Para 25)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, a Scheduled Tribe (ST) category candidate, applied for the post of Clinical Staff for Casualty Bed, Government Medical College, Rajouri, under Advertisement Notice No. 03/2019/030 dated 01.02.2019. The prescribed qualification was 10+2 with Science or above with Diploma in Medical Lab Technology from any recognised institute. A written test was conducted, and a provisional merit list placed the applicant at Serial No. 2 and the private respondent at Serial No. 1 under the ST category. The applicant challenged the selection of the private respondent, alleging that her diploma from the State Board of Technical Education was not a medical or para-medical qualification, was obtained on the basis of 10th class, and was not registered with the Para Medical Council, relying on an RTI reply. The select list was issued, the private respondent was selected, and an appointment order was issued. The applicant, placed in the waiting list, filed writ petitions challenging the select list and the appointment order, which were transferred to the Tribunal.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal held that the advertisement requirement was unambiguous in using the expression "Diploma in Medical Lab Technology" and the post was for Clinical Staff for Casualty Bed. The selection process must remain confined to candidates satisfying the essential qualification, and the Tribunal cannot permit substitution of essential eligibility through post-hoc explanations. The applicant produced material to prima facie show that the private respondent's diploma was not the same as the prescribed course. The respondents failed to produce any competent order showing equivalence. The Tribunal directed the official respondents to obtain a written eligibility verification from the competent authority regarding the private respondent's qualification. If found lacking, the private respondent's appointment is to be treated as unsustainable, and the applicant considered for appointment as next in order. Separately, if a vacancy existed, the applicant was to be appointed against it with notional seniority from the date the private respondent joined.

Issues: The main issues were whether the private respondent possessed the essential prescribed qualification of Diploma in Medical Lab Technology for the post of Clinical Staff for Casualty Bed, and whether the applicant, as a wait-listed candidate, had any right to challenge the selection or claim appointment.

Ratio Decidendi: Eligibility for a post must be determined strictly according to the prescribed qualification in the advertisement, and a candidate with a different qualification cannot be appointed unless equivalence is formally established by the competent authority. A wait-listed candidate may be considered for appointment if the selected candidate is found ineligible. Result : Transfer Applications allowed with directions.