Central Administrative Tribunal - Jodhpur
Suresh Kumar vs M/O Communications on 28 October, 2025
1- [O.A.508/2016]
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Original Application No.508/2016
Pronounced on : 28.10.2025
Reserved on : 29.09.2025
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HON'BLE DR. AMIT SAHAI, MEMBER (ADMINISTRATIVE) Suresh Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Swaroop, aged about 24 years, resident of Village Sirangarsar, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh (Raj), 335523.
...Applicant [By Advocate: Mr. A.K.Kaushik] Versus
1.Union of India through Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2.Superintendent of Post Offices, Sriganganagar Dn., Sriganganagar- 355001.
..Respondents [By Advocate: Mr. K.S.Yadav] O RD E R Per Mr. Rameshwar Vyas :
Being aggrieved by non acceptance of the candidature of the applicant for the post of GDS BPM, advertised vide Notifications dated 18.12.2015 and 02.03.2016 respectively, applicant has preferred this O.A. with a prayer to consider his candidature for selection/appointment to the post of GDS BPM treating his educational qualification equivalent to 10th Standard.
2. Facts of the case are as under :-
2- [O.A.508/2016] The second respondent issued Notifications dated 18.12.2015 and 02.03.2016 (Annexs. A/1 & A/2), inviting applications for engagement of Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS) under the Rajasthan Circle. As per eligibility requirements with regard to educational qualifications, the candidates should pass 10th Standard from the approved State Boards' by the respective State Government / Central Government.
It is the grievance of the applicant that he endeavored to fill up his form for consideration of his candidature but due to non acceptance of his qualification, his candidature was not considered. The applicant has passed Prathama Examination from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, in 2012. It is averred that his qualification is not being considered as recognized since he acquired the required qualification prior to 01.01.2015 i.e. the date when the new recruitment rules for appointment of GDS came into force which is evident from the letter dated 20.02.2015 (Annex.R/3), issued by the respondents.
3. It is further averred that earlier, second respondent issued separate notification/advertisement dated 27.12.2013 wherein, the applicant was held eligible (after litigation), having passed the Prathama examination prior to 31.05.2013. It is the grievance of the applicant that it does not appeal to reason as to how his qualification could be said to be valid for some time and invalid for other times. He acquired the requisite qualification from a recognized institute. The same would be valid for all times and not for particular requirements. The applicant is being deprived of his legitimate right for public employment on wrong pretext. The Prathama examination passed by him is equivalent to 10th Standard for service in the Central Government. He acquired the certificate before 01.06.2013. He also fulfills other eligibility conditions required for appointment for the post of GDS BPM. Assailing the action of the respondents in denying him educational qualification, the applicant has 3- [O.A.508/2016] prayed to allow this O.A. He has relied upon the letters dated 10.07.2012 and 06.12.2012,issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development.
4. On the contrary, the respondents in their reply averred that in the notification, it has been stipulated that the candidates should pass 10th Standard from the approved State Boards by the respective State Government / Central Government. It is further averred that the Department of Posts vide its letter dated 14.01.2015 (Annex.R/2), has revised the eligibility criteria for engagement to the GDS posts to be effective for the vacancies notified on or after 01.04.2015. The issue has further been clarified vide letter dated 20.02.2015 (Annex.R/3) issued by the Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts. As per the Notification dated 04.04.2017, issued in terms of revised educational qualifications, the applicant is not eligible to be considered for his engagement on the post of GDS.
5. The Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, vide its letter dated 06.12.2012, has withdrawn the order dated 10.07.2012 regarding cases of recognition in perpetuity for equivalence in Central Government jobs. All those students who are enrolled with the institutions with permanent recognition up to 31.05.2013, would be eligible for consideration in accordance with MHRD OM / Order in force pertaining to their course for equivalence in Central Government jobs.
According to letter dated 14.01.2015 (Annex.R/2), Prathama passed certificate of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, shall apply only to candidates applying for GDS posts against the notification issued prior to 01.04.2015. It is further averred that as per the revised engagement rules of GDSs which came into effect on 14.01.2015, the educational qualification is Secondary School Examination Pass Certificate of 10th standard conducted by any Recognized Board of School Education in 4- [O.A.508/2016] India. The applicant does not fulfill the above conditions. Contradicting the claim of the applicant, the respondents have prayed to dismiss the O.A.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
7. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that on previous occasions, pursuant to the notification issued in the year 2013, the applicant applied for the same post. When his candidature was not accepted, he filed OA No. 85/2014 -Suresh Kumar Vs. UOI & Anr. along with other applicants, which was allowed along with other OAs filed by the similarly situated candidates. While allowing the OAs, this Bench directed the respondents to consider the candidature of the applicants as per the provisions of law on the subject as stated above.
It is contended that once the educational qualification acquired by the applicant has been held as valid then there is no justification in denying the same degree on the ground that it will cease to effect from 14.01.2015. It is further submitted that the qualification acquired by the applicant is equivalent to 10th pass.
8. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondents contended that revised qualification for the post of GDS came into force w.e.f. 01.04.2015 and Prathama pass certificate of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan shall only apply to candidates against notification issued prior to 01.04.2015. It is contended that as per the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Higher Education notification, the recognition granted to Prathama examination conducted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan would remain applicable to candidates against the notification issued prior to 01.04.2015. Since in the present matter, a notification was issued in the year 2015 and then in the year 2016, the applicant would not 5- [O.A.508/2016] be treated to have acquired educational qualifications in terms of the revised rules.
9. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and material available on record, the point for consideration before us is, whether the certificate of Prathama examination issued by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 2013, cannot be denied as qualification for the post of GDS for which applications were invited in the year 2015 & 2016 vide Notifications at Annexs.A/1 & A/2.
10. A perusal of the record reveals that vide notification issued in the year 2015 & 2016 (Annexs.A/1 & A/2)), applications were invited for engagement of GDSs under the Rajasthan Circle. As per the eligibility criteria with regard to the educational qualifications, the candidate(s) should pass the 10th standard by any State Board approved by the respective State Government / Central Government. The Letter/Circular dated 14.01.2015 (Annex.R/2), addressed to all Chief Post Masters General says that the eligibility conditions for engagement to the post of GDS, has been revised which will be effective for the vacancies notified on or after 01.04.2015. It says that the engagement process initiated before 01.04.2015, shall be finalized as per the existing instructions.
In another letter dated 20.02.2015 (Annex. R/3), issued by the Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts, it has been clarified that the revised qualifications prescribed vide this Directorate's letter dated 14.01.2015, shall apply only to candidates applying for GDS post against the notification issued on or after 01.04.2015. Thus, 'Prathama pass certificates' of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, shall only apply to candidature against notification issued prior to 01.04.2015.
11. Perusal of the above letters suggests that the Department of Posts applied the revised qualifications with regard to notification issued on or 6- [O.A.508/2016] after 01.04.2015. The requirement of clarification vide letter dated 2015, arose on account of the decision of this Bench in OA No. 85/2014 along with the connected OAs (Annex.A/5) decided on 27.10.2014. In those OAs, the issue was with regard to interpretation of the OMs dated 06.12.2012 and 10.07.2012.
A perusal of the above OMs/Circulars reveal that vide letter dated 10.07.2012, issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, decided not to extend recognition granted to the Prathama Examinations conducted by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, after 26.10.2010. However, vide OM dated 06.12.2012, in order to facilitate the institutions during transition period, a decision has been taken that all those students who are enrolled with the institutions with permanent recognition up to 31.05.2013, would be eligible for consideration in accordance with MHRD OM / Order in force pertaining to their course for equivalence in Central Government jobs. However, these concerned orders will cease to have effect from 01.06.2013 onwards.
12. Perusal of the decision in the earlier OA No. 85/2014 filed by the present applicant along with others, reveal that the candidature of the applicants therein, was denied without considering the OM dated 06.12.2012. In the above circumstances, this Tribunal held that the OM dated 06.12.2012, is binding on the respondent department and the applicants were eligible for consideration of their candidature as per the recognition extended up to 31.05.2013.
13. In view of the above, it reveals that after withdrawing recognition to Prathama examination beyond 26.10.2010 and 10.07.2012, a clarification was issued vide OM dated 06.12.2012 protecting the rights 7- [O.A.508/2016] of candidates up to 31.05.2013 but, the protection ceases to have effect from 01.06.2013 onwards.
14. The Department of Posts after consultation with the Ministry of Human Resource Development, has further clarified vide letter dated 20.02.2015 that revised qualifications vide this Directorates' letter dated 14.01.2015, shall only apply to candidates applying for GDS post against notification issued on or after 01.04.2015.
In view of the above, it emerges that the respondents have revised the educational qualification for the post of GDS against the vacant posts advertised on or after 01.04.2015. Since the notification /advertisement in question, was issued after 01.04.2015, the applicant's, candidature was not accepted since educational qualification was lacking, as required by the advertisement. We are of the view that a candidate possessing Prathama Examination Certificate from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, cannot dictate the respondents to treat his certificate equivalent to matriculation. It is the domain of the respondents to regulate the eligibility criteria including the educational qualifications unless and until the criteria prescribed in the rules is discriminatory. In the present case, the applicant has not challenged the revised eligibility criteria for engagement to GDS post, as clarified vide letters dated 14.01.2015 and 20.02.2015 respectively with regard to the recognition granted to the Prathama Examination.
15. In view of the above, we find no justification to treat the Prathama Examination equivalent to 10th standard. Accordingly, we find no merit in this O.A., hence, the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Amit Sahai) (Rameshwar Vyas)
Member(A) Member (J)
JITE
jrm
NDR
A
RAJ
MEH
TA
8- [O.A.508/2016]