Himachal Pradesh High Court
________________________________________________________ vs Manoj Kumar And Another on 5 January, 2024
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur, Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
LPA No. 45 of 2021
Decided on: January 5, 2024
________________________________________________________
HP Staff Selection Commission ........... Appellant
.
Versus
Manoj Kumar and another ...Respondents
________________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Motta, Advocate.
of
For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Chauhan
and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocates,
rt for respondent No.1.
Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy
Advocate General, for respondent
No.2.
________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 22.2.2021 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWPOA No. 36 of 2019, titled Manoj Kumar v. State of H.P. & another, whereby petition filed by the respondent/petitioner (hereinafter, 'respondent') came to be allowed, appellant/respondent No. 2 (hereinafter, 'appellant') has approached this Court, by way of instant Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent read with Delhi High court Writ Rules and Orders, as applicable to this Court, praying therein to set aside the order and dismiss the petition.
2. The facts of the case are that a requisition was received by the appellant from the office of Engineer-in-Chief, Himachal Pradesh Public 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 2Works Department alongwith Recruitment and Promotion Rules, pursuant to which the appellant issued advertisement No. 31/2015, dated 7.7.2015, thereby inviting applications from eligible candidates .
for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical), wherein following essential qualification was prescribed, in terms of Recruitment and Promotion Rules:
"Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering from an Institution recognized by the State/Central of Government"
3. Respondent being a Diploma holder in Electronics and Communication Engineering, applied for the post in question. After his rt having cleared the written/screening test, respondent was called for personal/interview, however, Selection Committee rejected his candidature on the ground that he has submitted a Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, whereas, it was not the requisite qualification for the post in question and desirous candidates either should have Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the action of the appellant, respondent filed OA No. 739 of 2019 before the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, which on its abolition, came to be transferred to this court and re-registered as CWPOA No. 36 of 2019, praying therein for the following main relief(s):
"i. That the impugned order dated 18.05.2018 (Annexure A-4) as well as Annexure A-8 dated nil February, 2019 may very kindly be quashed and set aside.::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 3
ii. That respondent No.2 may very kindly be directed to allow the applicant to appear in the personal interview after fixing a special date thereof.
iii. That respondent no.2 may very kindly be directed to consider the case of the applicant for the post of Junior Engineer .
(Electrical) against post code No. 463, in the interest of law and justice."
5. Pursuant to the notice issued in the Original Application, appellant filed reply, stating therein that as per Recruitment and of Promotion Rules made available by the requisitioning Department i.e. Public Works Department, alongwith the requisition, post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) could only be filled up from amongst the rt candidates having Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering but since, in the case at hand, respondent is having Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, he is not entitled to be considered for the post in question, as such, no illegality can be said to have been committed by it, while rejecting candidature of the respondent.
6. Learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties and perusing the material available on record, allowed the petition vide order impugned in the instant proceedings and directed the appellant to consider the case of the respondent for sponsoring him for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) under relevant category, which, at the relevant time, was vacant. Being aggrieved by the order passed by learned Single Judge, appellant has approached this Court, by way of instant appeal, praying therein to set aside the same.
::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 47. It may be relevant to take note of the fact that vide order dated 15.5.2019, erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, directed the appellant to hold special interview of the respondent and to .
place on record result in a sealed cover, however, since no post was available at that time, respondent was not given appointment and as such, learned Single Judge, vide impugned order, directed the appellant and respondent No.2 to make an order for appointment of the respondent against the vacant post under relevant category. Even, in of pursuance to the orders passed in execution proceedings, the respondent stands appointed by the respondent on the post in question
8. rt and is working on the said post.
Precisely, the grouse of the appellant, as has been highlighted in the grounds of appeal and further canvassed by Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mottta, learned counsel for the appellant, is that since the Recruitment and Promotion Rules do not provide the Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering as essential qualification, learned Single Judge ought not have issued direction to the appellant to recommend name of the petitioner for appointment against the post in question.
Learned counsel for the appellant, while making this court peruse the Recruitment and Promotion Rules as well as report of Equivalence Committee made available to learned Single Judge, contended that a person having qualification of Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering could not have been offered appointment against the post in question. He submitted that as per report of Equivalence Committee, otherwise also, qualification prescribed in the advertisement i.e. Degree/Diploma in Electronics and Communication ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 5 Engineering cannot be said to be the requisite /appropriate qualification for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical).
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent, while supporting .
the impugned order, vehemently argued that once the appellant itself provided educational qualification for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical), in the advertisement as Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering and respondent was in possession of Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, of his candidature could not have been rejected by the appellant, on the premise that Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering is rt not the prescribed qualification for the post. He submitted that once, it is not in dispute that the respondent possessed the Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, which otherwise is the prescribed qualification, appellant was not competent to reject his candidature. He submitted that rather the respondent being more meritorious on account of having Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, ought to have been given weightage over other candidates, competing for the post.
10. While making this court peruse the advertisement, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently argued that as per prescribed qualification, a candidate having Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering is eligible to be appointed to the post in question. The opinion rendered after issuance of advertisement by the Equivalence Committee qua equivalence of Diploma in Electrical Engineering with Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, is of no consequence, as such, was ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 6 rightly not taken into consideration by learned Single Judge. Though, as per report of Equivalence Committee, which definitely came to be given after participation of the respondent in the selection process, .
suggests that the Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering cannot be treated as an appropriate qualification for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical), but the appellant, while issuing advertisement, prescribed qualification of Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering and thereafter, candidature of of the respondent and other similarly situate persons was accepted, he could not be ousted on the ground that he does not possess requisite qualification.
11. rt During the proceedings of the case, learned counsel for the appellant was unable to dispute that the persons having qualification of Diploma or Degree in Electronics Engineering stand offered appointment against the post in question. If it is so, opinion rendered by Equivalence Committee, as taken note above, may not be of much relevance. Otherwise also, advertisement issued by the appellant, provided for qualification of Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering, one of which, i.e. Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering is duly possessed by the respondent, now the question which needs determination is, 'whether on account of additional qualification i.e. Diploma in Communication, apart from Diploma in Electronics, could the appellant reject the candidature of the respondent?"
12. Answer to the aforesaid question would definitely be in the 'negative', because, mere possession of higher/ additional qualification ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 7 cannot be a ground to reject the candidature of a candidate, especially when requisite qualification as provided in the advertisement as well as Recruitment and Promotion Rules is/was Diploma/Degree in Electrical .
Engineering or Electronics Engineering, one of which is possessed by the respondent i.e. Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering.
13. No doubt, it would not be permissible to draw an inference that a higher qualification necessarily presupposes the acquisition of another, of albeit lower, qualification, but once a candidate possesses some qualification, in addition to requisite qualification, his candidature rt cannot be rejected on the ground that he possesses qualification other than the prescribed one. In the instant case, as has been noted herein above, qualification prescribed in the advertisement in issue was Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering, which otherwise is duly possessed by the respondent, yet the appellant rejected the candidature of the respondent on the ground that he possessed qualification other than the prescribed one, but, in the instant case, as has been noted herein above, qualification prescribed in the advertisement was Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering, one of which the respondent possesses i.e. Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, yet the appellant rejected the candidature of the respondent on the ground that the diploma possessed by the respondent is not in the subject of "Electronics" rather same is in the subjects of Electronics and Communication, but definitely, aforesaid analogy could not be adopted in the case of the respondent, while considering the candidature for the ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 8 post in question. Since the respondent possesses Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering, his candidature was required to be considered in terms of educational qualification .
prescribed in the advertisement as well as Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post in question.
14. There cannot be any quarrel with the proposition of law that prescription of qualification is a matter of recruitment policy. The State as the employer is entitled to prescribe the qualifications as a condition of of eligibility. In the instant case, appellant itself provided qualification of Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering in rt the advertisement as also the same exists in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules.
15. Having perused the qualification of respondent, it cannot be said that he did not possess the requisite qualification in terms of advertisement as well as Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post in question. Respondent apart from possessing degree/diploma in Electronics also possessed degree in communications. Additional qualification in the subject of "communications" alongwith degree/diploma in electronics cannot be construed to be 'higher' qualification, disentitling the respondent from participating in selection process for the post in question. Leaving everything aside, appellant itself provided that a candidate having diploma/degree in the subject of electronics shall be eligible to participate in the selection for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) and respondent possessed said qualification.
::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 916. At this stage, it would be relevant to take note of the opinion rendered by the Equivalence Committee, relevant portion whereof reads as under:
.
"The matter was discussed at length. The Committee was of the view that the Diploma in Electrical Engineering cannot be equated with the Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering. However, the representative of the Technical Education Department stated that as per the guidelines of the AICTE, the Diploma in Electrical Engineering is equivalent to the Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering. Therefore, the committee was of the view that the Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering may be treated as equivalent to the Diploma in of Electrical Engineering.
The Committee was also of the opinion that Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering OR Diploma in Electronics Engineering can not be treated as appropriate qualification for the post of Junior Engineer rt (Electrical)."
17. Learned Single Judge, while passing impugned order, rightly did not place much reliance upon the report given by the Equivalence Committee, which otherwise is vague. Equivalence Committee though initially opined that Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering may be treated as equivalent to the Diploma in Electrical Engineering, but in the same breath also opined that Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering OR Diploma in Electronics Engineering can not be treated as appropriate qualification for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical).
18. Since before rendering opinion as noted herein above, appellant had issued the advertisement in question, prescribing therein qualification of "Diploma/Degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering from an Institution recognized by the State/Central Government" and pursuant to the applications made by the desirous ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS 10 candidates in terms of the aforesaid advertisement, had conducted the screening test, learned Single Judge rightly ignored the aforesaid opinion rendered by the Equivalence Committee and directed the .
appellant to consider the case of the respondent for the post in question, which at the relevant time was lying vacant. "
19. Needless to say, it is no part of the role or function of judicial review to expand upon the ambit of the prescribed qualifications rather, prescription of qualification for the post is a matter of recruitment policy.
of State being employer is entitled to prescribe qualification as a condition of eligibility, but since, in the case at hand, appellant having taken note rt of the requisition sent to it by the requisitioning Department i.e. Public Works Department, issued advertisement for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical), prescribing therein essential qualification as noted herein above, learned Single Judge rightly did not comment upon the correctness of the same vis-à-vis opinion rendered by Equivalence Committee.
20. Consequently, in view of the above, we find no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. Order passed by learned Single Judge is upheld. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Sandeep Sharma) Judge January 5, 2024 Vikrant ::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2024 20:36:34 :::CIS