Nisha Choubey vs State of C.G. and Others

Satish K. Agnihotri, J.—Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was not in possession of D.Ed, examination certificate at the time of filing of an application. The last date for filing of the application for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III was 9-2-2008. The requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III is Higher Secondary School Examination and D.Ed. examination certificate. It is further prescribed that in the event D.Ed. candidates are not applicable, the other candidates may be considered. According to Ms. Meena Shastri, the Petitioner has completed D.Ed., during selection process. Learned Counsel further submits that since it is not prescribed asto when the Petitioner should have requisite qualification, the Petitioner is entitled to have benefit of D.Ed. examination certificate as it was produced at the time of interview. It is further submitted that a similar issue is pending consideration.

On query asto what is the general principle whether a candidate must possess requisite qualification either before filing of the application or any other fixed date mentioned in the advertisement? Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner is unable to give proper reply. In para 4.2 of the advertisement for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III (Annexure P/1), it was mentioned that on obtaining the marks of written test, list of D.Ed. candidates and Non-D.Ed. candidates shall be prepared. The qualification as required as a matter of general principle should be at the time of filing of the application for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III.

The question asto what should be the cut-off date in absence of any date specified, in this behalf either in the advertisement or in the reference is no longer res Integra. Hon''ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Ashok Kumar Sonkar Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, observed as under:

Possession of requisite educational qualification is mandatory. The same should not be uncertain. If an uncertainty is allowed to prevail, the same should not be flooded with applications of ineligible candidates. A cut-off of date for the purpose of determining the eligibility of the candidates concerned must, therefore, be fixed. In absence of any rule or any specific date having been fixed in the advertisement, the law, therefore, as held by this Court would be the last date for filing the application.

In the matter of Dipitimayee Parida Vs. State of Orissa and Others, , Hon''ble the supreme Court held that "ordinarily the qualification or extra qualification laid down for the recruitment should be considered as on the last date for filing of the application".

Applying the well settled principles of law to the facts of the present case, wherein no date was specified, the candidates must acquire the requisite qualification on the last date of filing of the application. The Petitioner did not have D.Ed. qualification at that time. Accordingly, the Petitioner mentioned in the application against D.Ed. qualification "No".

For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed summarily.