LexSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR. versus DHARAM BIR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
............. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR. v. DHARAM BIR JUNE 8, 1998 [S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] Service Law-MP. Industrial (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1985 Rr-13, 14--Educational qualification-Govt. can prescribe the mode A B of appointment and the qualifications for the post-Mere experience cannot C be equated to educational qualification-Government service after appointment ceases to be a mere contract but one of status governed by the statutes and rules applicable to the post-The capacity in which the post is held viz ad hoc /substantive capacity/temporary affects the status-Only when there is a provision in the statute or rules for an alteration of status, can a government servant claim it-Neither the Courts nor Tribunals can provide relief on D sympathetic grounds overriding the mandatory provisions of the Statute since such an order would amount to altering or amending provisions made under Article 300 of the Constitution. The respondent was holding the post of Principal on an ad hoc basis on promotion till the new Rules were promulgated. Under the said Rules the E candidate for the post of Principal was to possess a Degree or Diploma in Engineering and, since he had neither, he was disqualified for the post Principal but was appointed as Vice-Principal. Aggrieved by this order the Respondent challenged the order before the High Court which was later transferred before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal F allowed the petition on the ground that the requirement of qualification of diploma/degree was not necessary for promotees. Hence these appeals. Allowing the appeal by the State, this Court HELD : I. The respondent having worked in an ad hoc capacity on the post of Principal might have gained some administrative experience but the G same cannot be treated as equivalent to his knowledge in the field of Engineering. A Compounder, sitting for a considerably long time with a Doctor practicing in modern medicine, may have gained some experience by observing the medicine prescribed by the Doctor for various diseases or ailments but that does not mean that he, by that process, acquires knowledge H 511 512 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] 3 S.C.R. A of the Human Anatomy or Physiology or the principles of Pharmacology or the field of action of any particular medicine or its side effects. The Compounder cannot, merely on the basis of experience, claim a post meant exclusively for persons having MBBS or other higher degrees in medicine or surgery. The plea of experience, therefore, must fail. Moreover, this B would amount to a relaxation of Rule relating educational qualification Power to relax the Rule vests exclusively in the Governor as provided by Rule 21. This power cannot be usurped by the Court or the Tribunal. (524-H; 525-A-B) 2. If the Government, in exercise of its executive power , has created certain posts, it is for it to prescribe the mode of appointment or the C qualifications which have to be possessed by the candidates before they are appointed on those posts. The qualifications would naturally vary with the nature of posts or the service created by the Government. (524-E) D 3. The post in question is the post of Principal of the Industrial Training Institute. The Government has prescribed a degree or a Diploma in Engineering as the essential qualification for this post. No one who does not possess this qualification can be appointed on this post. The educational qualification has direct nexus with the nature of the post. The Principal may also have an occasion to take classes and teach the students. A person who does not hold either a Degree or a Diploma in Engineering cannot possibly E teach the students of Industrial Training Institute the technicalities of the subject of Engineering and its various branches. "Experience" gained by the respondent on account of his working on the post in question for over a decade cannot be equated with Educational qualifications required to be possessed by a candidate as a condition of eligibility for promotion to higher posts. [524-F-G) F 4. The plea that the Court should have a "human approach" and should not disturb a person who has already been working on this post for more than a decade also cannot be accepted as the Courts are hardly swayed by emotional appeals. In dispensing justice to litigating parties, the Courts not only go into the merits o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.