Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

J.Chelameswar,C.J.

This matter is placed before the Full Bench pursuant to an order of reference dated October 13, 2010. The facts of the case are narrated in detail in the order of reference and we do not propose to reiterate them.

2. The essential facts necessary to adjudicate the question referred can be summarised as follows: The Public Service Commission of Kerala is requested to conduct a recruitment process for the post of Junior Scientific Officer by the State of Kerala. The said post is created under the Kerala Chemical Examiner's Laboratory Service Special Rules, 1997. The basic academic qualification prescribed in the said Rules is Masters Degree with 50% marks in Chemistry or Forensic  Science or Bio-Chemistry of a recognised University. The question is, whether the Public Service Commission can recognise a Masters Degree in any other branch as an equivalent qualification to the qualification prescribed under the above-mentioned Rules. In the instant case, the Public Service Commission recognised a Masters degree in Applied Chemistry, Organic Chemistry and Inorganic Chemistry as equivalent qualifications to the prescribed qualification.

(b)(i) of the said rules in cases where acceptance of equivalent qualifications is provided for in the rules and such of those qualifications which pre-suppose the acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for the post, shall also be sufficient for the post".

8. It can be seen from the above Rule that qualifications required for a post may be prescribed by the  Special Rules applicable to the particular service in which the post is included or in the absence of any prescription by the Special Rules, to be specified by the executive orders of the Government. However, sub-clause (ii) deals with a specific situation of somebody claiming to be qualified for a particular post on the ground that he has the qualification which is equivalent to the qualification prescribed by the State. Sub-rule

(ii) declares that in certain contingencies specified in the said sub-rule, such a claim can be accepted. Those contingencies are - (i) the Government recognises by executive orders certain qualifications to be equivalent to the qualifications specified in the relevant Special Rules; (ii) the Public Service Commission accepts a qualification to be equivalent to the qualification specified in the Special Rules relevant to the post. But the acceptance of the Public Service Commission is required to be only in those cases where acceptance of the equivalent qualification is provided for in the Rules.

R.10 of the Kerala State Subordinate Service Rules stipulates that educational or other qualifications, if any, required for a post shall be as specified in the Special Rules applicable to the service in which that post is included or as specified in the executive orders of Government in cases where Special Rules have not been issued for  the post/service. The post of Junior Health Inspector Grade II is included in the Municipal Common Service. R.13 of the K.S.& S.S.R. stipulates that persons who possess either the special qualifications as per rules or an equivalent qualification is qualified to be appointed. Equivalent qualification is one which satisfies the test of either clause (i) or clause (ii) of sub-r.(b) of R.13 which indicates that either the Commission in a case where appointment has to be made in consultation with the Commission, or the Government, or the appointing authority with the approval of the Government, may recognise a qualification as an equivalent qualification. This is what has been done in the instant case. This question has been pointedly considered by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos.1730-32/88 where the question of appointment to the post of Ayurveda Pharmacist Grade II came up for consideration. Reversing the Bench decision of this Court, Apex Court held that the Commission did exercise their mind over the question of equivalent qualification after ascertaining the views of the appointing authority, and reached their conclusion in the light of relevant evidence and expressed their view when consulted by the Government. We are of the view that the principle laid down by the Apex Court is squarely applicable to the facts of this case as well. In such circumstances, we declare that P.S.C. and the State Government have got power under R.13 of the K.S.& S.S.R. to prescribe which are equivalent qualifications. The Writ Appeal lacks merits and it is accordingly dismissed.  language of Rules 10 and 13 and the relevance of such difference and, therefore, we are of the opinion that Viswam's case (supra) does not lay down the correct position of law and we declare as such. Consequently, we come to the conclusion that under the scheme of KS & SSR, the Public Service Commission is incompetent to deal with the question of equivalence of educational or other qualifications prescribed by the Special Rules, unless the Special Rules provide for the recognition of qualifications other than the prescribed qualifications as equivalent to the qualifications prescribed.