Krishan Kumar vs Haryana School Teachers Selection Board and Another

Augustine George Masih, J.—Petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing Haryana School Teachers Selection Board-respondent No. 1 to interview the petitioner for the post of Post Graduate Teacher, HES-II (Chemistry), for which the petitioner had applied for in response to the advertisement dated 07.06.2012 (Annexure P-1). It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner fulfills the requisite qualifications for appointment to the post and was, therefore, issued interview letter dated 16.07.2012 (Annexure P-5), vide which the petitioner was to be interviewed and verification of the documents done on 30.08.2012. In response to the said call, which was received by the petitioner, he appeared before the Selection Committee but was not interviewed on the ground that he possessed qualifications of M.Sc. Applied Chemistry whereas the advertisement issued by the respondents required M.Sc. Chemistry or Bio-Chemistry degree. Counsel contends that the degree of M.Sc. in Applied Chemistry, which is possessed by the petitioner, is equivalent to M.Sc. Degree in Chemistry and, therefore, the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner cannot sustain. Reliance in this regard has been placed upon the equivalence certificate issued by the Bundelkhand University, Jhansi dated 05.09.2011 (Annexure P-8), from where the petitioner had obtained his M.Sc. Applied Chemistry degree. He, accordingly, contends that the prayer, as made by the petitioner, deserves to be allowed on the ground that the qualification possessed by the petitioner fulfills the mandate of the advertisement entitling the petitioner to interview for the post, he had applied for.

I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and with his assistance, have gone through the records of the case.

The qualification prescribed for the post of Post Graduate Teacher Chemistry is as follows:-

M.Sc. Chemistry or Bio-Chemistry with at least 50% marks and B.Ed. from recognized university.

A perusal of the above would show that the requirement of the employer is specific i.e. M.Sc. Chemistry or Bio-Chemistry. Had it been M.Sc. Applied Chemistry, the said field could have also been mentioned because wherever they required or equated the field of study, which was to be treated as equivalent to M.Sc. Chemistry, it has been specified. This is apparent from the option Bio-Chemistry mentioned therein. For the post of Post Graduate Teacher Physics and Post Graduate Teacher Biology, the requisite qualifications have also been specified in the advertisement, which read as follows:-

A perusal of the above further fortifies the view taken by this Court as is apparent that wherever there was an option open or equivalence was to be treated and a candidate with a specified degree was to be held eligible for appointment, the same has been mentioned therein. Since M.Sc. Applied Chemistry is not a degree mentioned, which would be required for filling up the post of Post Graduate Teacher (Chemistry), the assertion of the petitioner that the degree possessed by him would entitle him for appointment to the post of Post Graduate Teacher (Chemistry), cannot be accepted. The equivalence certificate, which has been produced by the petitioner dated 05.09.2011 (Annexure P-8), has been issued by the Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, from where the petitioner has obtained his Post Graduate Degree, which would not help the claim of the petitioner. As per the instructions dated 02.11.1999 (Annexure P-7), the equivalence and the recognition of the degrees is dependent upon such a certificate/notification issued by the Kurukshetra University or Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak. The said certificate being not available on the record, the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted.

It would not be out of way to mention here that the petitioner had, on 18.09.2012 and 24.09.2012 when the case was taken up for hearing, sought time to produce such a certificate issued by the Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, but has failed to produce the same.

In any case, it is, by now, settled by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Som Dutt vs. State of Haryana and another, 1983 (3) SLR 141 that the discretion to prescribe the essential qualification for appointment to a particular post is of the employer and where it is not mentioned about the eligibility of the equivalent course to the prescribed qualifications either in the statuary Rules or in the advertisement, the absence of such a clause clearly indicates that the employer did not desire the appointment of a person possessing equivalent qualification. The Court should not generally delve into determining as to whether a particular qualification is an exact equivalent to the one prescribed in the advertisement/statutory Rules and leave the same to the employer to determine.

In the light of the pronouncement of the Full Bench of this Court on this issue, the prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition, cannot be accepted. Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same stands dismissed.