The single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that the candidates not fulfilling the requisite qualification at the time of appointment, are not eligible for appointment. Making a wrong entry in the application form regarding fulfilling the requisite qualification cannot give him the right to continue on the said post as he has been appointed upon qualifying for the examination. Even if detected later on that on the wrong premises, the appointment has been made since the eligibility criteria as per the advertisement and rules are not fulfilled, the appointment can be annulled.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the Petitioner submitted that he applied for the Post of Graduate Trained Teacher fulfilling all the requirements and eligibility criteria, and was appointed to the post of Trained (Literature) Teacher in the pay scale of Rs. 9,300 – 34,800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/-. Thereafter, the appointment letter was issued and the Petition was sent for training. Then, the Petitioner was relieved from joining upon the completion of training. The Petitioner was posted and even though he was working but salary was not given to him. Furthermore, the Petitioner received a show cause notice to submit his explanation why not his appointment be canceled for not fulfilling the eligibility criteria as he had obtained less than 50% marks in graduation. The Petitioner replied to the same and the Respondent not being satisfied with the reply canceled the appointment. Being aggrieved by this, the Petitioner approached the court.
Contentions of the Petitioner
The Petitioner contended that the Petitioner fulfills the requisite criteria for the appointment and the appointment of the Petitioner was canceled without adhering to the principles of natural justice. Also, the petitioner fulfils the pre-condition of Rule 4(Kh)(21) where it was provided that the candidate should score at least 45% marks in graduation or equivalent degree and should have completed a 1-year course of B.Ed.
The Petitioner relied upon the judgment titled of Neeraj Kumar Rai and others Vs. State of UP and other.
Contentions of the State
The state contended that the Petitioner didn’t fulfil the requisite criteria as per the advertisement and as per the rules of Jharkhand Elementary Teachers’ Appointment Rules, 2012, amended in 2014 – 15, rightly his appointment was canceled. It was furthermore contended that according to his application form submitted for appointment under the unreserved category, the petitioner passed his graduation in 2008 with 762 marks (excluding extra marks), which equals 49.16%. This is less than the required number of marks. Also, the matter was also placed before the establishment committee and the committee found that the Petitioner was wrongly appointed to the said post.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble court observed that as per established law, candidates who do not meet the necessary qualifications at the time of appointment are ineligible for the appointment. Erroneously entering his qualifications on the application form does not grant him the right to remain in the position, as he was appointed after passing the test. Even if it is later discovered that the appointment was made on false grounds and that the requirements for eligibility stated in the advertisement and the rules were not met, it may still be revoked.
It was furthermore observed that the Jharkhand Elementary School Teachers Appointment Rule, 2012 has been framed on the basis of NCTE Regulation as per the directive of the RTE Act. The minimum percentage of marks required for admission to the B.Ed. program was increased from 45% to 50% for students from the unreserved category after the NCTE revised the rule. As the petitioner was enrolled in a one-year B.Ed. program, the guidelines published by the NCTE in 2009 apply to him. As a result, he received less than 50% of the required marks for graduation, making him eligible for admission to the B.Ed. program in his home state of West Bengal as a reserved category candidate. However, for the same reason, he is not qualified to be selected for a position as an upper primary school teacher in the state of Jharkhand, or in any other state.
It was noted that the judgment upon which the Petitioner relied will not be applicable to the facts of the present case.
The court relied upon the judgments titled Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and others, and State of Punjab Vs. Surendra Kumar.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the view that the petitioner did not fulfill the requisite qualification, rightly his appointment has been held to be void ab initio.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court dismissed the Writ Petition.
Case title: Snehashis Das Vs The State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N. Pathak
Case No.: W.P.(S). No. 1561 of 2018
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Ashim Kumar Sahani, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Mr. Sharabhil Ahmad, AC to SC (Mines)
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :