JAGDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Online application forms were invited by the Punjab Public Service Commission (respondent No.3) for recruitment to 141 posts of Agriculture Development Officer (for short, 'ADO') in the Department of Agriculture and Welfare of Farmers, Punjab. In terms of clause 4.1 of the advertisement, for a candidate to be eligible to compete, it was essential to possess a degree in B.Sc. (Agriculture) (with minimum sixty percent marks) from any recognised University or Institution. The petitioners, who qualified B.Sc. (Agriculture) and even possessed a degree in M.Sc. (Agriculture), sought to apply online, but as they did not possess the essential qualification, i.e. B.Sc. (Agriculture) (with minimum sixty percent marks), the system did not accept their applications. It is in this backdrop, a Certiorari is prayed for, to quash the notification dated 28.11.2016 (Annexure P-4), vide which amendment was caused to the PunjabAgriculture (Group A), Service Rules, 2013, (for short, '2013 Rules'), as also the advertisement No.2, dated 28.1.2020, (Annexure P-l), to the extent, a candidate is required to have passed B.Sc. (Agriculture) with minimum sixty percent marks, being invalid and arbitrary.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that recruitment and other conditions of service to the post of ADO are governed by the 2013 Rules, and in terms of Rule 6 of the said Rules, a candidate with a degree in M.Sc. (Agriculture) in 2nd Class was eligible. However, pursuant to the amendment caused to the said Rules on 28.11.2016, the expression, "should possess degree in M.Sc. in Agriculture in Td Class", was substituted with the expression, "should possess degree in B.Sc. (Agriculture) (with minimum sixty percent marks)." Thus, he submits that without any plausible reason, the essential qualification required for appointment to the post of ADO was lowered from M.Sc. (Agriculture) 2nd Class, to B.Sc. (Agriculture) 1st Class. Further, for the petitioners and the candidates, who are similarly placed, are debarred to compete, clause 4.1 of the advertisement, that envisages essential qualification, is unjust and arbitrary. In essence, it is urged that candidates with higher qualification, i.e. M.Sc. (Agriculture) are considered ineligible, whereas, those with the lower qualification, i.e. B.Sc. (Agriculture), are eligible to apply. He has also placed reliance upon a decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Manjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others, 2010 (3) SCT 703, to supplement his submission, and asserts that it squarely covers the matter in issue.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.