Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sudhir Kumar vs Union Public Service Commission (Upsc) on 23 January, 2023
1
O.A. No. 168/2023
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No. 168/2023
Dated Monday this the 23rd Day of January, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjit More, Chairman
Hon'ble Mr. Mohd Jamshed, Member (A)
Sudhir Kumar
S/o Late Shri Jitender Verma
Aged about 40 years,
R/o H. No. P. 77A, St. No. 4,
Shankar Nagar Extension,
Krishna Nagar, Delhi - 110051,
Presently posted as
Asstt. Registrar at Dr. B. R. Ambedkar,
University Delhi w.e.f. 7-12-2021 on deputation,
...Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Ranjit Sharma)
Versus
1. Union Public Service Commission
Through the Secretary, Dholpur
House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi-69
2. The Govt of Delhi
Though the Principal Secretary
Department of Education
Old Secretariat, Delhi - 54
3. Director of Education
Govt of NCT of Delhi
At Old Secretariat, Delhi - 54
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. R V Sinha for UPSC and Mr. Amit Anand
for GNCTD)
2
O.A. No. 168/2023
ORDER
Per: Justice Ranjit More, Chairman Heard Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the UPSC.
2. The applicant's candidature to the post of Principal in Directorate of Education, Education Department, GNCTD is rejected on the ground that he is lacking essential qualification. As per the Advertisement in question, applications were invited to fill up 363 posts of Principal. The essential Educational qualification required is as under:
1. Master's Degree from a recognized University/Institute
2. Bachelor of Education(B.Ed) from a recognized university/institute.
3. The applicant's candidature is rejected for lack of educational qualification ie. B.Ed degree. The applicant accepts that he does not possess B.Ed degree. His contention is that he possesses degree of Bachelor in Library Science and the same should be considered equivalent to B.Ed degree. We are unable to accept this submission since the Recruitment Rules and the 3 O.A. No. 168/2023 advertisement in question are specific with regard to educational qualifications. What is required therein is B.Ed degree and not Bachelors in Library Science.
4. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the circular dated 21.01.2011 issued by GNCTD and the decision of a learned single Judge of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP 9483/2015 . Under the said circular the post of the Librarian was declared as a teaching post.
In our considered opinion, this will not come to the rescue of the applicant. By the said circular, merely the post of Librarian was declared as a teaching post. However, for the post of principal, the candidate must be a Post Graduate and possess B.Ed Degree. So far as the decision of the Hon'ble High Court referred supra is concerned, it relates to the age relaxation and same is also not applicable to the present facts and circumstances.
5. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel lastly argues that under the Note 1 of the advertisement, UPSC has discretion to relax the qualification for the reasons to be recorded in writing. Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for UPSC submits that the UPSC cannot relax the essential qualifications in favour of one candidate. Normally, the Commission takes such a decision in respect of a class of persons. We do not find 4 O.A. No. 168/2023 anything wrong in the approach of the UPSC by not exercising such discretion in favour of the applicants in particular.
6. The application is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Dasti.
(Mohd Jamshed) (Justice Ranjit More) Member (A) Chairman /gm/