Chandan Kumar Dubey vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4056 Jhar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             W.P.(S) No. 2428 of 2018
                                      --------

       Chandan Kumar Dubey                                   ...     ....    Petitioner
                                         -Versus-

1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Home, Jail and Disaster Management, 1st Floor, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

2. Deputy Inspector General of Police, HEC Administrative Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

3. Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission through its Secretary, Chaibagan, Kalinagar, Namkom, Ranchi.

4. Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Chaibagan, Kalinagar, Namkom, Ranchi.

                                                         ...      ..... Respondents
                                    ---------
     CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK
                                    ---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gaurav Abhishek, AC to AG For the JSSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate

----------

07/ 28.10.2021 The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the order in form of "Remarks" as contained in score card (Annexure-11) issued by the respondents, wherein it has been mentioned that the petitioner does not have the requisite qualification for appointment, even when the petitioner has duly completed BCA which is the required degree/ qualification for appointment.

Petitioner has further prayed for quashing the part of final result (Annexure-10), whereby even though the petitioner has obtained a total of 531.760 marks, his candidature has been rejected and the person having 531.242 marks have been considered and appointed under General category.

Pursuant to advertisement No. 07/2017, floated by the respondent- JSSC for the post Jharkhand Police Radio Sub Inspector Wireless, being eligible in all respect, the petitioner applied and appeared in recruitment process but he was not declared successful despite obtaining more marks than the last selected candidate in his category on the ground that he does not have the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Police Radio Sub Inspector (Wireless). Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has knocked the door of this Court.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondent-JSSC submits that since the petitioner was not having the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Police Radio Sub Inspector (Wireless), rightly his candidature has not been considered. Learned counsel further submits that the averments to that effect has been made in para-14 of the supplementary counter-affidavit dated 26.03.2021 filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

In view of fair submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent- JSSC and in view of the averments made in para-14 of the supplementary counter- affidavit it is crystal clear that since the petitioner was not having the requisite qualification, rightly his candidature was not considered for appointment to the post of Police Radio Sub Inspector (Wireless) pursuant to Advt. No. 07/2017, published by respondent-JSSC.

Para-14 of the supplementary counter-affidavit reads as under:

"14. That it is stated that aforesaid stand/ argument as advanced by the petitioner that Diploma Certificate recognized by AICTE is equivalent to Intermediate (10+2) is not maintainable in view of the fact that in the Advertisement it has been categorically been mentioned in Clause-4 that the minimum educational qualification for the post is Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering with Second Class or B.Sc. in Physics with 2 nd Class or BCA degree with Intermediate Science from an educational institution recognized by Central, State Government or AICTE and Candidates with Higher Technical Education qualification can also apply. It is evident that in the advertisement nowhere it is mentioned that candidate with qualification in Intermediate and equivalent is eligible. In other words, Candidate with the qualification of BCA must possess Intermediate in Science to apply for the post."

From perusal of the records, it is crystal clear that for appointment to the post of Police Radio Sub Inspector (Wireless), a candidate was required to have qualification of BCA with Intermediate in Science but as the petitioner was not having requisite qualification of intermediate in science his case has not been considered.

More particularly, the petitioner was having qualification of BCA with diploma in Information Technology, whereas, as per the advertisement

floated by the respondent-JSSC, the required qualification for appointment to the post of Police Radio Sub Inspector (Wireless) was BCA with Intermediate in Science and as such, rightly his candidature was rejected by the respondent- authorities.

Law is well settled that recruitment process must be completed as per terms and conditions in the advertisement and as per rules existing when the recruitment process began.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Prakash Chand Meena & Ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in (2015) 8 SCC 484 has held that:

"8. Having heard the parties, we have also perused the written submissions filed on behalf of some of them and have perused the judgment of the learned Single Judge and the impugned judgment of the Division Bench. In our considered view, the issue noticed at the outset must be decided on the basis of settled law noticed by learned Single Bench that recruitment process must be completed as per terms and conditions in the advertisement and as per rules existing when the recruitment process began. In the present case, the Division Bench has gone to great lengths in examining the issue whether B.P.Ed. and D.P.Ed. qualifications are equivalent or superior to C.P.Ed. qualification but such exercise cannot help the cause of the respondents who had the option either to cancel the recruitment process if there existed good reasons for the same or to complete it as per terms of advertisement and as per rules. They chose to continue with the recruitment process and hence they cannot be permitted to depart from the qualification laid down in the advertisement as well as in the rules which were suitably amended only later in 2011. In such a situation, factual justifications cannot change the legal position that respondents acted against law and against the terms of advertisement in treating such applicants successful for appointment to the post of PTI Gr.III who held other qualifications but not the qualification of C.P.Ed. Such candidates had not even submitted separate OMR application form for appointment to the post of PTI Gr.III which was essential as per the terms of advertisement.

9. The candidates who were aware of the advertisement and did not have the qualification of C.P.Ed. also had two options, either to apply only for PTI Gr.II if they had the necessary qualification for that post or to challenge the advertisement that it omitted to mention equivalent or higher qualification along with qualification of C.P.Ed. for the post of PTI Gr.III. Having not challenged the advertisement and having applied for the other post, they could not have subsequently claimed or be granted eligibility on the basis of equivalence clarified or declared subsequently by the State Government. In the matter of

eligibility qualification, the equivalent qualification must be recognized as such in the recruitment rules or Government order existing on or before the initiation of recruitment process. In the present case, this process was initiated through advertisement inviting application which did not indicate that equivalent or higher qualification holders were eligible to apply nor the equivalent qualifications were reflected in the recruitment rules or Government Orders of the relevant time."

In the instant case, the petitioner has also not challenged the advertisement on the ground that the respondent-JSSC has omitted to mention intermediate in science or its equivalent along with the qualification of BCA for appointment to the post of Police Radio Sub Inspector (Wireless) and as such, at this stage no right has accrued to get appointment on the ground that he has obtained more marks than last selected candidate since the petitioner was having qualification of BCA with diploma in Information Technology.

As a sequel to the aforesaid observations, rules, guidelines, legal propositions and judicial pronouncements, the instant writ petition merits dismissal and the same is hereby dismissed.

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) kunal/