PRAKASH CHAND MEENA & ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

Citation: [2015] 3 S.C.R. 729 · Decided: 19-03-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V. GOPALA GOWDA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 3 S.C.R. 729 
PRAKASH CHAND MEENA & ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. 
(Civil appeal Nos. 3057-3058 of 2015) 
MARCH 19, 2015 
[V. GOPALA GOWDA AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Service Law - Recruitment - Advertiseme[lt for two C 
different posts, having different qualifications- In the midway. 
the State Government as well as the Public Service 
Commission changing the qualification for the posts -
Permissibility -
Held: Recruitment process must be 
completed as per tenns and conditions in the advertisement D 
and as per rules existing when the recruitment process began 
- The equivalent qualification must be recognized as such 
in the recruitment rules or Government Order existing on or 
before initiation of recruitment process - In the present case, E 
the State Government as well as the Commission departed 
from the qualification laid down in the advertisement as well 
as the rules -
Hence recruitment on the basis of 
subsequently changed qualification, not pennissible. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court · 
F 
HELD: 1. Recruitment process must be completed 
as per terms and conditions in the advertisement and 
as per rules existing when the recruitment process 
'began. In the present case, the Division Bench has gone G 
to great lengths in examining the issue whether B.P.Ed. 
and D.P.Ed. qualifications are equivalent or superior to 
C.P.Ed. qualification but such exercise cannot help the 
cause of the respondents who had the option either to 
cancel the recruitment process if there existed good H 
729 
730 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
reasons for the same or to complete it as per terms of 
advertisement and as per rules. They chose to continue 
with the recruitment process and hence they cannot be 
permitted to depart from the qualification laid down in 
the advertisement as well as in the rules which were 
B suitably amended only. later in 2011. In such a situation, 
.factual justifications cannot change the legal position 
that respondents acted against law and againstthe terms 
of advertisement in treating such applicants successful 
C for appointment to the post of PTI Gr.Ill who held other 
qualifications but not the qualification of C.P.Ed. Such 
candidates had not even submitted separate OMR 
application form for appointment to the post of PTI Gr.Ill 
which was essential as per the terms of advertisement. 
D [Para 9] [735-A-E] 
2. In the matter of eligibility qualification, the 
equivalent qualification must be recognized as such in 
the recruitment rules or Government order existing on 
or before the initiation of recruitment process. In the 
E present case, this process was initiated through 
advertisement inviting application which did not indicate 
that equivalent or higher qualification holders were 
eligible to apply nor the equivalent qualifications were 
F reflected in the recruitment rules or Government Orders 
of the relevanttime. [Para 10] [735-H, 736-A-B] 
. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil. Appeal Nos. 
3057-3058 of 2015. 
· ·From the Judgment and Order dated 01.07.2013 of the 
G High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur in D. 
B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) Nos. 1157 & 1181 of2012. 
M. R. Calla, Vijay Hansaria, Pratiksha Sharma, Ankit 
Acharya, Subodh Pathak, Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Akhilesh 
H Kumar Pandey, Swati Chandra, Anjul Dwivedi, Sarad Kumar 
PRAKASH CHAND MEENAv. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 731 
Singhania, H. D. Thanvi, Mukul Kumar, Surya Kant, Aishwarya A 
Bhati, Anshuman, Madhurima Ghosh, Hemendra Sharma, S. 
S. Shamshery, Amit Sharma, Sandeep Singh, Ruchi Kohli, 
Arjun Harkauli, Aftab Ali Khan for the appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the 
parties. Leave granted. 
B 
2. The issue in these appeals is whether the Division 
Bench of Rajasthan High Court is correct in reversing the 
judgment of the learned Single Judge and permitting the C 
qualification of B.P.Ed. to be treated as.equivalent to 
qualification of C.P.Ed. for the purpose of selection and 
recruitment to the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade-Ill 
(PTI Gr.Ill). 
D 
3. The facts necessary for deciding the main issue noted 
above are as follows. Rajasthan Public Service Commission 
(hereinafter referre1 to as 'the Commission') published an 
advertisement dated 03.09.2008 inviting applications for 
recruitment to the post of PTI Gr.II under Code No.35 and PTI 
E 
Gr. Ill under Code No.36. The educational
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.