ZONAL MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, KOCHI & ORS. versus AARYA K. BABU & ANR.

Citation: [2019] 11 S.C.R. 627 · Decided: 08-08-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. BANUMATHI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
627
ZONAL MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE,
KOCHI & ORS.
v.
AARYA K. BABU & ANR.
(Civil Appeal No. 6206 of 2019)
AUGUST 08, 2019
[R. BANUMATHI AND A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.]
Service Law – Recruitment – Change in qualification/criteria
after notification for recruitment – Respondent No.2- IBPS issued
notification for post of Agricultural Field Officer (scale-1) –
Requirement in the notification was of graduates possessing degree
in ‘Agro-Forestry’ – Process of selection was undertaken and the
private respondents were provisionally selected – However, after
verification of their documents, their selection was cancelled on
the ground that private respondents did not possess the qualification
prescribed in the notification – As the private respondents had
degree in ‘Forestry’ – Writ  petitions – High Court held that
qualification of the private respondents was appropriate – That
apart, error was taken note by the Ministry of Agriculture and Farms
Welfare that no 4-year Bachelor program in Agro-Forestry was
available in the Country and it was suggested that B.Sc(Forestry)
graduation be considered for the position of Agricultural Field
Officer – Accordingly, a corrigendum dated 16.01.2016 was issued
– In that background, the termination orders of the private
respondents were set aside by the High Court – On appeal, held: If
there is any change in qualification/criteria after the notification is
issued but before the completion of the selection process and the
employer/recruiting agency seeks to adopt the change it will be
incumbent on the employer to issue a corrigendum incorporating
the changes to the notification and invite applications from those
qualified as per the changed criteria and consider the same along
with the applications received in response to the initial notification
– In the instant case, the private respondents were issued appointment
letters on 17.09.2015 and 29.05.2015 respectively, the change was
made subsequent thereto by the general corrigendum dated
16.01.2016 by including the qualification of B.Sc. (Forestry), which
   [2019] 11 S.C.R. 627
627
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
628
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 11 S.C.R.
would be effective from that day by providing opportunity to all
those holding that qualification –  Therefore, in such case the change
of qualification whereby the qualification of the private respondents
gets included subsequently cannot enure to their benefit alone when
several others who could have applied were prevented from doing
so – In the said circumstance, the orders of the High Court set aside.
Service Law – Recruitment – Power of the Court in providing
equivalence of qualification – Held: The question in regard to
equivalence of educational qualifications is a technical question
based on proper assessment and evaluation of the relevant academic
standards and practical attainments of such qualifications and where
the decision of the Government is based on the recommendation of
an expert body which possesses the requisite knowledge, skill and
expertise for adequately discharging such a function, the Court,
uninformed of relevant data and unaided by the technical insights
necessary for the purpose of determining equivalence, would not
lightly disturb the decision of the Government.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. If the decision of the Supreme Court in the case
of Mohd. Sohrab Khan v. Aligarh Muslim University & Ors. is kept
in perspective it is clear that while examining the correctness of
the action of the employer what would be sacrosanct will be the
qualification criteria published in the Notification, since if any
change made to the qualification criteria midstream is accepted
by the Court so as to benefit only the petitioners before it, without
making it open to all the qualified persons, it would amount to
causing injustice to the others who possess such qualification
but had not applied being honest to themselves as knowingly
they did not possess the qualification sought for in the Notification
though they otherwise held another degree. Therefore, if there
is any change in qualification/criteria after the notification is issued
but before the completion of the selection process and the
employer/recruiting agency seeks to adopt the change it will be
incumbent on the employer to issue a corrigendum incorporating
the changes to the notification and invite applications from those
qualified as per the changed criteria and consider the same along
with the applications

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.