DHARMENDRA KUMAR NIRMALKAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks a writ/direction to quash the order dated 24.09.2008 (Annexure P/5) whereby the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III has been cancelled on account of the fact that the petitioner did not have the Higher Secondary Examination Pass Certificate. Shri Tulsyan further submits that since the petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination of B.A. Part III course, on the basis of Diploma Certificate in Electrical Engineering obtained from M.P. Board of Technical Education, Bhopal, the same is equivalent to Higher Secondary Examination Pass Certificate.

(2.) SMT. Ghai, learned Counsel appearing for the State/respondents 1 and 2 submits that the requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III is Higher Secondary Examination Pass Certificate, not any equivalent certificate. Admittedly, the petitioner is not in possession of Higher Secondary Examination Pass Certificate. Thus, the petitioner is not qualified for being considered for appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III, even if he has obtained graduation degree in Arts from Guru Ghasi Das University. Thus, the decision of the respondent authorities is just and proper and needs no interference.

(3.) IT is a trite law that a candidate, even if, he is successful in the select list, has no indefeasible right to appointment. If the petitioner has no indefeasible right to appointment, no writ can be issued directing the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner or any other person. (See Ludhiana Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Amrik Singh and Ors. and Union of India and Ors. v. Kali Dass Batish and Anr.).