Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manish And Others vs Haryana State Cooperative Supply & ... on 25 September, 2012
Author: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Garg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012
Date of decision: 25th September, 2012
Manish and others
... Petitioners
Versus
Haryana State Cooperative Supply & Marketing Federation Limited
and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Present: Ms. Anu Chatrath Kapur, Advocate for the petitioners.
RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.
The respondent, vide an advertisement No.3/2009 dated 28th February, 2009 (Annexure P-1) advertised various posts mentioned under different categories. In the above said advertisement, against Category No.10, 46 posts of Field Inspector (Store) were advertised. The essential qualifications for the said post, as advertised, are reproduced herein below:
"i) Graduate from recognized University.
ii) Minimum one year diploma in computer from the recognized University/ Institution.
(iii) Hindi/ Sanskrit upto Matric Standard."
According to the averments made in this petition, the petitioners were duly eligible and thus, applied for the said post. It is the further case of the petitioners that considering them duly eligible they were interviewed and in the result declared they were selected within the advertised posts in their Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012 2 respective cadres. However, the petitioners were not offered appointments in spite of the fact that the candidates lower in merit than the petitioners were offered such appointments.
Aggrieved from the aforesaid action of the respondents, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, while arguing that the petitioners are fully eligible as per the required qualifications, has stated that petitioners No.1 to 4 are Bachelor of Computer Application, whereas petitioner No.5 is Bachelor of Science (Information Technology) (lateral entry) and also possess the qualification of Hindi and thus, they are fully eligible as per the required qualifications. It is the further case of the petitioners that they are possessing equivalent qualification to the qualification as prescribed in the advertisement and thus, they cannot be considered ineligible on the ground that they do not possess the minimum qualification prescribed for the said post.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further argued that a Bachelor of Computer Application is a Graduate with Computer Science/Applications, whereas an ordinary Graduate is required to qualify Post-Graduate Diploma in Computer Application to be at par with a Bachelor of Computer Science/Applications, and thus, the petitioners who are Bachelor of Computer Application, are equal to a Graduate who is also having one year Diploma in Computer from the recognized University/Institution.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further relied upon instructions (Annexures P-13 and P-14) and the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in 'Dhananjay Malik & ors v. State of Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012 3 Uttaranchal & ors' (Civil Appeal No.1771 of 2008, decided on 5th March, 2008) and has argued that a candidate possessing a Bachelor's degree in the subject is to be equated, with Graduation and one year Diploma in that subject and while making appointments both the holders of such qualification are to be treated at par. Learned counsel has further argued that on the basis of said analogy, a person having qualification of BCA is to be treated at par with a Graduate, with one year Diploma in Computer, as required by the respondents vide advertisement (Annexure P-1).
It is their further case that whenever the advertisements are issued by the Boards/Commissions, they have always prescribed BCA as an alternative qualification. To support his case, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon an advertisement (Annexure P-10) issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board.
On the basis of aforesaid arguments, it has been prayed that the action of the respondents in not offering appointments to the petitioners is liable to be quashed.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the documents placed on record of this case.
It is not in dispute that in response to the applications submitted, the petitioners were interviewed. However, it may be noticed that while examining claim of the petitioners, the competent authority has found that they do not fulfill the prescribed minimum qualifications for the post, as provided in the common cadre rules of The Haryana State Cooperative Supply And Marketing Federation Limited, i.e. Graduate from recognized University and minimum one year Diploma in Computer from recognized University/ Institution.
Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012 4
At this stage, it may be noticed that the petitioners have applied for the post on the basis of their single qualification i.e Bachelor of Computer Applications/Bachelor of Science (Information Technology) claiming that they fulfill the twin qualifications of (i) Graduate from recognized University and (ii) Minimum one year Diploma in Computer from the recognized University/Institution, as required by the respondent authorities vide advertisement (Annexure P-1), and they cannot be considered ineligible on the ground that they do not possess the minimum qualification prescribed for the said post.
Much stress has been laid on the argument that a Bachelor of Computer Applications/Science is a Graduate with Computer Applications/Science, whereas an ordinary Graduate is required to qualify Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application to be at par with a Bachelor of Computer Applications/Science, and thus, the petitioners who are BCA are equal to a Graduate who is also having one year Diploma in Computer from the recognized University/Institution.
It may further be noticed that a similar argument on same facts was raised before this Court in CWP No.16307 of 2012 titled as 'Rishi Pal and others v. Haryana State Cooperative Supply & Marketing Federation Limited and another' decided on 24th August, 2012, however, the same was not accepted.
Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that in CWP No.16307 of 2012 this Court had failed to take notice of the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in Dhananjay Malik's case (supra), wherein in similar circumstances a Bachelor of Physical Education was treated at par with those who were holding BA/ Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012 5 B.Sc./B.Com. degree with a Diploma in Physical Education for the purpose of employment as Directors of Physical Education or on other similar posts. The reliance placed on Dhananjay Malik's case (supra) and the instructions (Annexures P-13 and P-14) is clearly mis-placed, as in that case the required qualification was Bachelor of Physical Education or Graduate with Diploma in Physical Education, and thus, the employer itself has equated the Degree of BPE with the qualification of Graduate and Diploma in Physical Education. Moreover, in that case specific instructions were issued by the Government making the Degree of B.P.E. Equal to Graduate with Diploma, whereas in the instant petition, three separate and distinct qualifications are required as under:
i) Graduate from recognized University.
ii) Minimum one year diploma in computer from the
recognized University/ Institution.
iii) Hindi/ Sanskrit upto Matric Standard.
and the employer has not equated the Degree of BCA with the twin qualifications required as above. The instructions (Annexures P-13 and P-14) do not deal with the subject and are of no help to petitioners.
At this stage, it may also be noticed that the right of an employer requiring a specific qualification suitable to the job, cannot be ignored and challenged. Moreover, in CWP 14205 of 2012 titled as 'Vijay Kumar v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission' decided on 30th July, 2012, for the selection of same post of Field Inspector (Store) against advertisement No.2/2011 dated 6th December, 2011, the same qualifications, as in the instant case, were prescribed. A short reply was filed Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012 6 on behalf of the Haryana Staff Selection Commission, which may be noticed as under:
"1. That the petitioner in the present writ petition has prayed before the Hon'ble High Court for directing the Re- spondent to allow the petitioner to appear in the interview for the post of Field Inspector (Store), HAFED against Advt. No.2/2011 dated 6.12.2011 (Annexure P-1) which are going to be held on 31.7.2012 and 1.8.2012.
In this connection, it is, respectfully, submitted that the advertised qualification for the post of Field Inspector (Store) is as under:-
i) Graduate from the recognized University.
ii) Minimum one year diploma in Computer from recognized University/institution.
iii) Hindi/Sanskrit up to Matric Standard.
The petitioner possesses the following qualifications:-
i) 3 Year Diploma in Information Technology from State Board of Technical Education, Haryana.
ii) B.Tech. course in Information Technology from Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar.
The petitioner on the basis of 3 Year Diploma has se- cured the admission in 2nd year B.Tech. through Lateral Engi- neering Entrance Test (LEET) and completed his B.Tech. in In- formation Technology. Therefore, he fulfills the (i) clause of the advertisement i.e. Graduation from the recognized University and does not possess the (ii) qualification of One year Di- ploma in Computer from recognized University. The Haryana Staff Selection Commission is merely a recruiting agency and carries out the recruitment strictly as per qualification pre- scribed by the appropriate authority i.e. Haryana State Coop- erative Supply & Marketing Federation Ltd., Panchkula (HAFED) in the instant case. However, the petitioner has not impleaded the HAFED as a necessary party in the present writ Civil Writ Petition No.15025 of 2012 7 petition. The HAFED vide letter dated 22.6.2012 (Annexure R-
1) has categorically made clear that even an Engineering Graduate having a degree of B.Tech., B.Sc. Engineering, B.E. etc. fulfills only the first part of the minimum qualifications.
Even he has to have the second part of the qualification also. Therefore, the petitioner does not fulfill the condition of adver- tised qualification of one year Diploma in Computer from rec- ognized University/Institution and as such he is not eligible for interview. Therefore, no cause of action subsists to the peti- tioner in the present writ petition."
The aforesaid stand taken by the respondents clearly demonstrates that the respondent-authorities have already taken a conscious decision and have issued instructions vide their letter dated 22nd June, 2012 making it clear that even an Engineering Graduate having a degree of B.Tech./ B.Sc.(Engineering)/B.E. etc. fulfills only the first part of the minimum qualification and he has to have the second part of the qualification also and if such a candidate does not fulfill the condition of advertised qualifications of one year Diploma in Computer from a recognized University, he is not eligible. Keeping in view the stand taken in the said written statement, the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide its judgment dated 30th July, 2012.
In these circumstances, this Court finds no merit in this petition. No other point has been argued.
Dismissed.
(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE September 25, 2012 rps