Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 6778
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, J
Ashish Kumar Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPS/3956/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Goutam Khetrapal
For the Respondents: Mr. Shashank Thakur, Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari
The authority has discretion to set educational qualifications for recruitment, which cannot be challenged unless shown to be arbitrary or discriminatory.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16, and 309 - Recruitment Rules - The petitioner challenged the qualifications set in an advertisement for recruitment, claiming exclusion of Arts graduates was unreasonable and ultra vires. The court upheld the authority's discretion to set qualifications, stating that they cannot be struck down unless manifestly arbitrary or discriminatory. (Paras 4, 11, 12)
(B) Judicial Review - The court clarified that it cannot dictate qualifications for a post as this falls within the employer's prerogative unless proven arbitrary. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, holding a B.A. degree, contended that the qualifications for the Assistant Director post excluded him unreasonably. The advertisement expanded eligibility beyond the statutory recruitment rules.
Findings of Court:
The qualifications set by the statutory authority were deemed valid and not discriminatory, thus the petition was dismissed.
Issues: Whether the exclusion of Arts graduates from eligibility constituted unreasonable classification and if the qualifications set were ultra vires.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the authority has the discretion to set qualifications and cannot be compelled by the court unless shown to be arbitrary or discriminatory.
Result: Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges the qualifications set in recruitment advertisement. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding the exclusion of arts graduates. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on authority's discretion in setting qualifications. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court affirms qualifications must not be arbitrary or discriminatory. (Para 12) |
| 5. final ruling dismissing the petition. (Para 13) |
1. Heard Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State / respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr.Anand Mohan Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 / PSC.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-
“a) issue a writ, order or direction, moreover in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned advertisement and the rule and issue the direction to Respondent to amend the present advertisement to the extent to include the subject of art under the minimum qualification required for taking the exam.
b) Issue an appropriate writ, thereby declaring the Rule 8 Schedule-III Column No. 5 of Chhattisgarh State Industries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1985 brought in by notification dated 08.02.2007, which was issued in exercise of powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India , as ultra vires to Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India .
c) pass any other order(s) that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.”
3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.2 / PSC published an advertisement for direct recruitment for the post of Assistant Director, Industry/Manager (Department of Commerce and Industry) by the advertisement No. 01/2025/Examination/ dated 03.03.2025 and the same was published on 05.03.2025, whereby they notified a total of 30 posts. The said advertisement provided various information regarding the examination, including but not limited to the tentative date of preliminary examination and mains examination, the date of filling the form of the exam etc. As per point 2(iv) of the advertisement, the essential qualification required for the examination is-Bachelor's degree in Engineering in any discipline or a Postgraduate degree in Industrial Chemistry, Commerce, Economics, Physics, or Chemistry, or an MBA/PGDM (AICTE approved) from a recognized institution.
4. From the prayers and pleadings made in the writ petition, it is revealed that following are the core grudges of the petitioner :
“(i) The requisite educational qualification provided under Clause 2(iv) of the Advertisement for candidate applying for the posts advertised is not suited to petitioner's educational qualification i.e., "Arts graduates" therefore the same are liable to be amended.
(ii) The qualification namely "or MBA/PGDM (AICTE) From Recognized Institute" is beyond the scope provided in Schedule III Rule 8 of the Chhattisgarh State Industries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1985.
(iii) Rule 8 of Schedule-III Column N-5 of the Chhattisgarh State Industries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1985 declare ultra vires to article 309 of the Constitution of India .
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that exclusion of Arts graduates from eligibility for the post of Assistant Director (Industry/Management) amounts to an unreasonable classification, which lacks intelligible differentia and bears no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved. He further submitted that the Schedule III, Rule 8 of the Chhattisgarh State Industries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1985 prescribes the essential educational qualification for the post of Assistant Director, Industry/Manager (Department of Commerce and Industry) as a degree from a recognized university in Electrical, Electronics, Metallurgical, Industrial or Chemic
