SATYA PAL CHANDRODAYA Vs. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a graduate having another (1999 Lab. I. C. 2285) 3. Shankar vs. Reserve obtained his B. A. Degree in the year 1996. A requisition was sent India (Writ Petition No. 2690/1999 decided on 26. 4. 2000)through Employment Exchange vide Annexure-5 for filling up the post of Pharmacist with a minimum eligibility qualification to be Matriculation or any other equivalent qualification with a certificate of Nursing Course or Diploma in Pharmacy. THE petitioner was possessing all the qualifications. THE name of the petitioner was also sponsored by the Employment Exchange for consideration, however, because of the condition in the requisition that the names of graduates were not to be considered and by the time interview letter was sent and at the time of appearing in the interview, he had cleared the degree examination, his interview was not taken on 11. 9. 1996 on the ground that he has now become the graduate. It is contended by the petitioner that at the time of his application or sponsoring the name of June 1996, he was not a graduate as the result was declared lateron. THE petitioner is aggrieved of the action of the respondent in denying him the opportunity of being appointed as according to him out of three candidates who had appeared, two were not selected and the post of still lying vacant. THE petitioner is challenging the action interalia on the following grounds; (i) that at the time of his name was sponsored, he was not a graduate till the last date of submission of application; (ii) he acquired graduation qualification subsequently i. e. in September 1996; (iii) even if the petitioner is a graduate, but the essential qualifications which are required for the post of Pharmacist is diploma in Pharmacy which he possesses and there is no reason to deny him the consideration.

(2.) IN the reply filed by the respondent, it is stated that it has been specifically mentioned to the Employment Exchange that the graduates were not eligible for the post and only Matriculates with Diploma in Pharmacy were required to be interviewed. It is further pleaded by the respondent that even in the interview letter it was mentioned that in case any candidate has become graduate his name would not be considered and that the bank has decided on 30. 6. 1996 as a policy not to appoint a Pharmacist who was a graduate.

(3.) GUJARAT High Court in Special Civil Application No. 3125/1994 decided on 21. 2. 1995 was seized of the matter in appointment of regular part-time bank medical officer. The facts of the case have no relevancy for the reason that the question involved in the case of GUJARAT High Court related to the period of experience wherein it was found that the petitioner in that case had no experience of five years as a general practitioner.