GANGA CHOWDHURY Vs. B.D.O. TAMLUK II AND ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-1996-5-21
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on May 06,1996

Ganga Chowdhury Appellant
VERSUS
B.D.O. Tamluk Ii And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Satya Brata Sinha, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 7.9.95 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in C.O. No. 8595 (W)/87 whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner is limine. The petitioner applied for a vacant post of 'Anganwadi worker' under the integrated Child Development Project. From annexure 'A' to the writ application it appears that the qualification prescribed for the said post was that the persons applying for the same must possess School Final or equivalent examination or passed High Secondary Examination (Old Course).
(2.) The petitioner is a graduate. She was appointed in the said post but her appointment was cancelled only on the ground that she is a graduate. The learned trial Judge, in the impugned order, held:- "If the annexure-A is taken into consideration in my view, it will open the flodgate where persons having required qualification will not get entry. In that view of the matter the decision taken by the Officer-in-Charge of the Child Development Project Officer is perfectly dear and justified. Beside on perusal of the writ application it does net appear that there was an ingredient of any public law for which it instant writ application is maintainable."
(3.) Ex facie and prima facie, we do not agree with the reasonings of the learned Trial Judge. Over qualification, in our opinion, prima facie, dues not disentitle a person from being considered for appointment. In terms of Article 16 of the Constitution of India, each person who is entitled to be considered for appointment should be considered. If a person has a right to be considered for appointment in terms of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, in our opinion, the fact that a candidate is over qualified by itself cannot be a ground for setting aside his/her appointment. As the right of the petitioner under Article 16 of the Constitution of India has prima facie been infringed, in our opinion, the petitioner has made out a case for hearing.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.