Gauhati High Court
Arif Ahmed vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors on 8 August, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010157042022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5137/2022
ARIF AHMED
S/O LT. AMIN AHMED,
R/O AMOLPATTY MIRAZABAGH,
P.O.- DIBRUGARH HEAD POST OFFICE,
P.S.- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN- 786001.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.
REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS,
SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN, RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI- 110001.
2:THE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED
REP. BY CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
INDIAN OIL BHAWAN
NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE
SRI AUROBINDO MARG
YUSUF SARAI
NEW DELHI- 110016.
3:CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED
INDIAN OIL BHAWAN
NOETHERN REGIONAL OFFICE
SRI AUROBINDO MARG
YUSUF SARAI
NEW DELHI- 110016.
Page No.# 2/4
4:DIRECTOR
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED
INDIAN OIL STATE OFFICE
INDIAN OIL BHAWAN SECTOR- III
NOONMATI
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN- 781020
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T DEURI
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 08-08-2022
Heard Mr. T Deuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that
the petitioner has not been allowed to participate in the Advertisement No.
DP/5/5(Open) dated 21.07.2022, for filling up of 9 (nine) posts of Senior
Law Officer issued by the Indian Oil Corporation, on account of Clause 2(g)
of the Advertisement, which requires a candidate to have the following
details on the recruitment portal:
(i) CLAT 2022 Admit Card Number
(ii) CLAT 2022 Application Number
(iii) Date of Birth (dd-mm-yyyy format)
(iv) Score obtained in CLAT 2022 (up to two places of
Page No.# 3/4
decimal without rounding off)
The Advertisement further states that the portal will allow the candidates to
proceed further only when the entries made against the above queries match
with the CLAT 2022 database.
The petitioner's counsel submits that the advertisement has restricted the
number of candidates, who can appear in the selection process, in violation of
the equality of opportunity clause, as provided in Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India. He further submits that only a miniscule proportion of
candidates who have connections with elite Law institutions are eligible to apply,
thereby depriving the petitioner, who is less fortunate than those who have
studied in the law colleges that are not a part of the CLAT consortium.
The petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Kerela High Court in
WP(C) No. 30638/2021, (Aishwarya Mohan vs. Union of India & 5 Ors.) which
was disposed of vide judgment dated 06.06.2022, in support of his submission
that the petitioner should also be allowed to take part in the selection process.
The petitioner's counsel submits that there has been no appeal filed against
the judgment dated 06.06.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 30638/2021.
The petitioner's counsel also submits that by restraining the participation of
candidates, such as the petitioner, the respondents have invoked the idea of
indirect discrimination.
The question that would have to be decided is whether the essential
qualifications for appointment to a post, is the prerogative of an employer to
decide and whether this Court under the garb of judicial review can delve into
the issue, with regard to the employer's right to lay down essential qualifications
and eligibility criteria for appointment to a post.
Page No.# 4/4
List the matter on 9th August, 2022.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
