Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manasdatta Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 February, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 1 st OF FEBRUARY, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 2305 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
MANASDATTA MISHRA S/O SHRI VISHNUDATTA
MISHRA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
PRIVATE JOB R/O VI LLAGE O J H A PURWA POST
PARIHARIN PURWA TAHSIL J AWA DISTRICT REWA
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI SHASHANK PANDEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SCHOOL
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, VALLABH BHAWAN
DISTRICT BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COMMISSIONER PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
GAUTAM NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. JOINT DIRECTOR, PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
DIVISION REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION BOARD, VYAPAM,
BHOPAL CHAYAN BHAWAN, MAIN ROAD NO.1,
CHINAR PARK (EAST) BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.02.01 17:42:40 IST
Petitioner's contention is that he was seeking appointment as Madhyamik
Shiksha for which Professional Examination Board, Bhopal, issued an
advertisement to organize Madhyamik Shikshak Eligibility Test 2018.
Admittedly, petitioner possesses qualification of Bachelor of Computer
Application from Makhanlal Chaturvedi National University of Journalism and
Communication, Bhopal.
Petitioner's contention is that he had applied for English subject, but his
candidature is rejected with a note "Isnatak Mein Nirdharit Mool Vishay Na
Hona, Anya Karan : Snatak BCA Jismen Core Vishay Angreji Sahitya Na
Hone Ke Karan".
Petitioner's contention is that he has thereafter passed M.A. Exam in
English subject from Awadhesh Pratap Singh University, Rewa. Thus, it is
submitted that petitioner since possesses higher qualification of M.A. in English,
therefore, in terms of the judgment of Supreme Court in State of Uttarakhand
and others Vs. Deep Chandra Tewari and another [(2013) 15 SCC 557], he
is entitled to be considered and in this backdrop a prayer is made to direct the
authorities to consider his representation.
Petitioner's contention is that in para 11 of the said judgment Hon'ble
Supreme Court has held as under :-
"We are conscious of the principle that when particular qualifications are
prescribed for a post, the candidature of a candidate possessing higher
qualification cannot be rejected on that basis. No doubt, normal rule
would be that candidate with higher qualification is deemed to fulfill the
lower qualification prescribed for a post. But that higher qualification
has to be in the same channel. Further, this rule will be subject to an
exception. Where the prescription of a particular qualification is found
to be relevant for discharging the functions of that post and at the same
time, the Government is able to demonstrate that for want of the said
qualification a candidate may not be suitable for the post, even if he
Signature Not Verified
SAN possesses a "better" qualification but that "better" qualification has no
relevance with the functions attached with the post."
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.02.01 17:42:40 IST
Shri Manas Mani Verma, submits that higher qualification should be in
the same channel. This is what has been noted by Hon'ble Supreme Court in
para 11. Higher qualification of the petitioner is admittedly not in the same
channel i.e. he has not passed Graduation Examination with English Lit. subject
and, thereafter applied for M.A. in English and since it is not in the same
channel, this judgment in State of Uttarakhand and others Vs. Deep Chandra
Tewari and another(supra), will be of no assistance to the petitioner.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record, I am of the opinion that aforesaid judgment rendered by Supreme Court
is crystal clear. It categorically held "No doubt, normal rule would be that
candidate with higher qualification is deemed to fulfill the lower qualification
prescribed for a post. But that higher qualification has to be in the same
channel. Further, this rule will be subject to an exception. Where the
prescription of a particular qualification is found to be relevant for discharging
the functions of that post and at the same time, the Government is able to
demonstrate that for want of the said qualification a candidate may not be
suitable for the post, even if he possesses a "better" qualification but that
"better" qualification has no relevance with the functions attached with the post,
then it is evident that no indulgence can be shown.
In the present case, admittedly Madhyamik Shikshaks are recruited to
teach upto Class-VIII. Requirement of Graduation in the subject in the core
subject in which petitioner is seeking appointment i.e. English Literature is not
available in BCA. Higher qualification of M.A. for which petitioner has filed his
mark sheet will show that M.A. fulfills different requirements and not the
Signature Not Verified
SAN
requirements as are taught in Graduation.
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.02.01 17:42:40 IST
Therefore, for want of necessary qualification as prescribed, rejection of
petitioner's candidature cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary calling for any
indulgence in the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
Accordingly, petition fails and is dismissed.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
A.Praj.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.02.01 17:42:40 IST
