Chattisgarh High Court
Santosh Chandrakar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 February, 2025
Digitally
signed by
ASHISH
ASHISH TIWARI
TIWARI Date:
2025.02.28
10:00:26 1/3
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Order Sheet
WPS No. 6343 of 2016
Santosh Chandrakar versus State Of Chhattisgarh
18/02/2025 Shri Aman Upadhyay, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Abhishek Singh, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 and 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is holding B.Tech Degree in Mechanical and Production Engineering. An advertisement was issued on 23/12/2015 inviting applications for appointment on the post of Assistant-Workshop Superintendent (Polytechnic Institution). The essential qualification for applying in the post was a degree in Mechanical Engineering / Technology or equivalent from any recognized University. The petitioner was successful in the written examination, he was also called for interview and during course of scrutiny of documents, the petitioner was found ineligible on account that the petitioner was not holding requisite 2/3 qualification as required in the advertisement. He further submits that the petitioner is having the requisite qualification as he holds a degree of Mechanical and Production Engineering and the respondents illegality held that the petitioner is not holding the requisite qualification.
Dr. Agrawal submits that this Court cannot draw any equivalence between the degree held by the petitioner and the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement, and the seats have already been filed and selected candidates have not been arrayed as a respondent.
This Court on 22/11/2016, while admitting the petition observed that any appointment made on the post of Assistant Workshop Superintendent, the same shall be subject to the final outcome of this petition. From the return of the State Government as well as Public Service Commission it appears no sufficient documents are placed on record to show as to why the degree of Mechanical and Production Engineering is not in accordance with eligibility qualification prescribed in the advertisement.
The State is directed to place the list of selected candidates on record and their Educational Qualification for perusal of this Court and any other documents to show as to how the respondents reached to a conclusion that a degree held by the petitioner is not as per the eligibility criteria fixed in the 3/3 advertisement.
List it in the week commencing 17th March, 2025.
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish