Madhya Pradesh High Court
Amit Kumar Dubey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 April, 2022
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
ON THE 12th OF APRIL, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 21103 of 2018
Between:-
AMIT KUMAR DUBEY S/O LATE SHRI UDAY BHAN
DUBEY , AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, H. NO. 1112
KANCHGHAR NAYABASTI JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AKASH CHOUDHARY, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
PETITIONER)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN,
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COMMISSIONER URBAN ADMINISTRATION AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PALIKA BHAWAN
NEAR BUS STOP NO. 6 SHIVAJI NAGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI KAMAL SINGH BAGHEL, LERANED GOVERNMENT
ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENTS/STATE)
T h is petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 27.08.2018 (Annexure- P/1) whereby the petitioner's case for appointment to the post of Revenue Inspector is turned down on the count that he does not hold necessary qualification of one year Diploma and, therefore, he is not entitled to be appointed on the post of Revenue Inspector.
Brief facts leading to filing of this case are that the petitioner is presently holding the post of Lab Assistant with the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur.
Signature Not Verified SANPursuant to an open advertisement issued by the respondents through Professional Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.04.12 19:12:31 IST Examination Board dated 18.06.2015, the respondents advertised the post of 2 Revenue Inspector to be filled up amongst the aspirants holding the necessary qualification of Bachelor's degree from the recognized University along with Diploma in Local Self Governance along with Proficiency in Computer. The petitioner is B.Sc. along with Diploma in Local Self Governance. He also holds the Computer Proficiency certificate issued by the competent authority under the M.P. Urban Service for Poor wherein the petitioner has completed the basic course of Computer. The petitioner is fully qualified to be appointed as Revenue Inspector on the basis of aforesaid qualification.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the only ground for rejection of his candidature is that he did not possess the Diploma in Computer Application. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the rejection of order dated 27.08.2018 wherein the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner does not posses one year Computer Diploma. According to the M.P. Municipal Corporations (Appointment and Conditions of Service of Officers and Servants) Rules, 2000 (herein after referred to as "the Rules of 2000"), the educational qualification prescribed for the post of Revenue Inspector is Bachelor Degree from a recognized University along with Diploma in Local Self Governance and Proficiency in Computer.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that his candidature has been rejected on the ground of non possession of Diploma in Computer Application. The petitioner has been working with the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, since 02.12.2016 and discharging the duties of a Clerk working with Computer with utmost satisfaction and has already been rendered more than five years of successful service. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner does not possess Computer Proficiency. It is also submitted that the petitioner had completed a Program duly authorized by the employer Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur for which a certificate was issued on 02.12.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner has already cleared the requisite exam/test and it is only at the time of verification Signature Not Verified of the documents his candidature has been rejected. It is also argued that the SAN Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR respondents cannot add or subtract anything in terms of Rules of 2000. The word BURMAN Date: 2022.04.12 19:12:31 IST "Proficiency" is used for an aspirant should have knowledge enough to manage a 3 Computer. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside.
On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner does not possess the Computer Diploma from any recognized institution and, therefore, is not entitled for any relief. It is further stated that proficiency in Computer could only be assessed with the help of degree or certificate issued by a recognized institution. The petitioner has only attended the basic course of Computers that does not mean that he has acquired the proficiency in the subject. The job of the Revenue Inspector is mainly assessing the land and doing the demarcation and the same has to be done with precision and zero percentage of error. Any small variation in the demarcation may lead to a grave dispute of property, possession and ownership. Therefore, the petitioner ought to have possess the qualification of diploma. On these grounds prays for rejection of the writ petition.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Admittedly, as per the advertisement, the qualification for appointed to the post of Revenue Inspector is Degree from recognized University with Diploma in Local-Self Governance and Proficiency in Computer. Nowhere in the Rules or any of the terms and conditions of advertisement, it is prescribed that a candidate should possess one year diploma course in Computer. The petitioner herein is duly qualified to be appointed on the post of Revenue Inspector since he possesses the requisite qualifications prescribed. It is not in dispute that the petitioner being an eligible candidate had participated in the written examination conducted by the respondents and was declared successful and it is only at the time of verification of documents, the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27.08.2018 so far as it relates to the petitioner is hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner treating the certificate to be a certificate of Computer Proficiency and as a consequence issue appointment order in favour of the petitioner along with consequential benefits. Let the exercise be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.
Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.04.12 19:12:31 ISTThe writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated herein above.
4No order as to costs.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE vinay* Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.04.12 19:12:31 IST