MANOJ KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In pursuance to vacancy Circular/Advertisement (Annexure P-1), petitioner and respondent No.3-Hemlata Bawa had applied for the post of Primary Teacher in the Scheduled Caste Category. As per Circular/Advertisement (Annexure P-1), after the written test, eligible candidates were required to submit the requisite documents and thereafter, interview was to be held for the reserved post of Primary Teacher in question.

(2.) Learned counsel for respondent-Institute informs that Circular/Advertisement (Annexure P-1) was issued in March, 2016, which was followed by a Notice of 27th April, 2016 (Annexure P-4), which dispensed with the interview while indicating that marks for additional qualifications would be (i) five marks for PG Diploma (ii) six marks for PG degree and (iii) seven marks for MPhil/ Professional qualification in the field. It is not in dispute that petitioner is having Post Graduate Degree in Economics whereas respondent No.3- Hemlata Bawa is having degree of Masters in Education (MEd), for which she has been given seven marks. It is also not in dispute that petitioner had secured 57.5 marks whereas respondent No.3- Hemlata Bawa had secured 58.25 marks.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that as per Notice (Annexure P-4), respondent No.3- Hemlata Bawa has been granted seven marks for additional qualification, whereas petitioner has not been granted six marks for additional qualification i.e. Post Graduate Degree in Economics. It is submitted that once petitioner gets six marks for Post Graduate Degree in Economics, then his score would be 63.5 marks, whereas respondent No.3- Hemlata Bawa has 58.25 marks and so, in place of respondent No.3- Hemlata Bawa, petitioner ought to be appointed as Primary Teacher. To submit so, reliance is placed upon Supreme Court's decision in Bishnu Biswas and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors, 2014 5 SCC 774.