SURESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition is filed mainly with the following prayer:

(2.) In the reply at para 3, it is stated as follows:

(3.) We are afraid, the respondents have not appreciated the facts properly. This is a case where the petitioner was called for interview as per Annexure P-5, letter dated 23.7.2009 and interview was to be held on 5.8.2009. Admittedly, the position as on that date was that the essential qualification was only of graduation in the subject concerned. The subject combination was prescribed only as per Annexure P-13, Notification dated 22.10.2009. According to the learned Senior Additional Advocate General, it is only a clarification. That contention also cannot be appreciated. It is not a clarification simplicitor. It has the effect of amending the basic qualification. In respect of a vacancy notified and the selection process commenced, the same has to be concluded only in terms of the conditions of service including the qualification governing the post as on the date of the notification. The amendment would be applicable only in respect of the vacancies which arose after the amendment and for which selection process had been commenced. That is a well settled position under the law as per the decision of the Supreme Court in AIR 1983 Supreme Court 852, Y.V.Rangiah and others vs. J. Sreenivasa Rao and others and (2008) 3 Supreme Court Cases 641, A. Manoharan and others vs. Union of India and others.