S.N.BHATIA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The constitutional validity of Col. No. 11, clause No, 1 of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Superintending Engineer (Civil), Class -I (Gazetted), in the Public Works Department of the Himachal Pradesh (8th Amendment) Rules, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Rules) is mainly under challenge herein.

(2.) The impugned amendment, (Annexure P -6), confines the promotional avenue to the post of Superintending Engineer (Civil), Class -1, to Executive Engineer (Civil) holding recognised degree in Civil Engineering or equivalent with at least seven years regular or regular combined with ad -hoc service as Executive Engineer (Civil). Prior to the enactment of the Amendment Rules, the promotional Superintending Engineers, Diploma Holders could not be made eligible.

(3.) In the State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa and others, [AIR 1974 SC 1], it has been ruled in no uncertain terms that formal education may not always produce excellence but a classification founded on variant educational qualification is, for the purposes of promotion to a higher post, not unjust on the face of it The onus, therefore, lies on a person challenging rules which make classification based on educational qualifications to prove the plea of discrimination and to adduce cogent and convincing evidence in support thereof. It has been further ruled in the said decision that the State is entitled to take into account the factor of achieving administrative efficiency and that if the classification is clearly co -related to such object, it cannot be said to be invalid, for, higher educational qualifications are at least a presumptive evidence of a higher mental equipment. Even where the employees are integrated into a common class, they could, for the purposes of promotion to a higher cadre, be classified on the basis of educational qualifications,