POOJA AGARWAL AND ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioners are assailing the essential qualification for the post of Executive Trainee (Law) mentioned in the advertisement No. CC/01/2015 dated 11.03.2015 on the ground of violation the rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India i.e. Equality before law and equality of opportunity in matters of public employment under Article 16 of the Constitution of India. The relevant portions of the said advertisement indicating the eligibility criteria which are now impugning in the present writ petition are quoted hereunder: -

(2.) HEARD the petitioners in person and also Mr. R Deb Nath, learned CGC appearing for the respondents.

(3.) THE appointing authority is the one who is to appoint its employee for a certain type of service or for a certain post. Therefore, appointing authority is to decide the requirement of service of a particular employee or a particular post and what type of service would be required by the appointing authority. Therefore, it is the appointing authority who is to decide the eligibility criteria for their employees. Over and above, it is the policy matter of the Appointing Authority. The writ court has no expertise to decide the requirement of service or the eligibility criteria of the type of post required by the appointing authority. The Apex Court in Jagadeesan v. Union of India reported in : AIR 1990 SC 1072 clearly held that it is for the Govt. to decide what qualification was required for the promotion to the post of Director and unless that requirement was totally irrelevant or unreasonable, it could not be said to be bad in law. It is fairly well settled law that the writ court can interfere with the qualification and essential requirement prescribed by the appointing authority for a particular post only when the qualification and essential requirement prescribed by the authority has no nexus with the object to be achieved. On bare perusal of the said advertisement dated 11.03.2015 and the particular of the job, this Court cannot come to the conclusion that prescribing good academic career for the candidates for the post of Executive Trainee (Law) has no nexus with the object to be achieved. Para 8 of the AIR in Jagadeesan's case (Supra) reads as follows: -