RAM PRASAD PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is B. Sc. in Agriculture from the Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner and had also passed Higher Secondary (Agriculture) examination in the year 1988 in First Division, registered with the employment exchange and being eligible, had applied for the post of Agriculture Supervisor in pursuance of the advertisement Annex. 1. He was called for interviewon 17. 6. 1993. Certain candidates were selected. It is submitted by the petitioner that out of 900 appointees, 50 candidates were such who were holding qualifications much lesser than the petitioner i. e. Senior Secondary or Senior Higher Secondary and were included in the select list. THE petitioner wants to submit that the higher qualification in Agriculture were totally ignored whereas persons possessinglower qualifications were appointed as per the order dated 15. 9. 1993. It is stated that as per the advertisement dated 8. 7. 1993, the minimum qualification required for the post of Agriculture Supervisor is to be Higher Secondary with Agriculture (old scheme) or Senior Higher Secondary Agriculture (10+2 ). THErefore, the advertisement was contrary to the Rules where the minimum qualifications are to beb. Sc. Agriculture and, therefore, the selection made by the respondents is to be quashed. A prayer has been made that the advertisement as well as the selection be quashed.

(2.) A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents No. 1 and 2. The facts so far as the issuance of the advertisement etc. are concerned, are not denied. How-ever, it is submitted that all the 900 candidates selected in pursuance of the advertisements have been appointed. It is further submitted that vide Annex. R. 2 an amendment was made in the Rules and the minimum qualification prescribed for the post in question was incorporated as Senior Higher Secondary under 10+2 with Agriculture or Higher Secondary (Agriculture) under the old scheme. It is furtherstated that the selection had been made as per the judgment handed over in Dinesh Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (1) wherein a direction was issued that the marks for personal interview should be reduced to 10% and for qualifying examination the marks should be prescribed as 80% to 90% in the case of recruitment to the post of Agriculture Supervisors.

(3.) THE judgment relied upon i. e. Dinesh Kumar's case (supra) cannot be interpreted to say that the higher qualifications of a person are to be totally ignoredin preparing the merit list. If the criteria adopted by the respondents is allowed to be retained, there is bound to be frustration amongst the highly qualified candidates. It can never be held that a higher secondary passed candidate is more meritorious than a graduate or post graduate. In such situation the ignoring of the qualifications and the rights of the graduates or post graduates for allotment ofmarks to them, for the qualifications possessed by them, cannot be said to be a proper course of selection.