Selection panel cannot alter qualification fixed by the employer: High Court

Once eligibility criteria is provided in the advertisement, nowhere does it leave any room for selection committee to alter/interpret academic qualification. It ought not have ventured to call other candidates to produce equivalence certificate.

This was held by the HP High Court while dealing with an issue “whether selection committee comprising of experts, could, of its own, change the prescribed qualification or not?”

While setting aside the recommendations of the expert committee whereby it had recommended the names of those candidates who were not having the requisite qualification in terms of the advertisement, Justice Sandeep Sharma observed that “though the Selection Committee comprising of experts may have adequate knowledge of the subject in question, once respondent-university, while issuing advertisement for selection to the post of Assistant Professor in the discipline of Agricultural Biotechnology, had specifically provided for essential qualification of MSc (Agricultural Biotechnology), without there being any power vested in that regard by competent authority, could not have called upon the candidates to produce equivalence certificate.”

The court passed this order on a petition filed by the aspirants for the post of Assistant Professor in Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur.

It was contended in the petition that university issued advertisement on March 8, 2019, for filling up the vacant posts of Assistant Professor in Agricultural Biotechnology. Consequent to the aforesaid advertisement, 49 applications were received within the stipulated period. Out of 49 candidates, only five candidates, including petitioners, were possessing the requisite essential qualifications. However, the applications of 32 candidates, who did not possess Master’s Degree in Agricultural Biotechnology including selected candidates, were entertained provisionally subject to production of certificate of equivalence of their MSc Degree with MSc (Agricultural Biotechnology).

It was further contended that the Selection Committee, of its own, introduced the equivalent qualification, which is contrary to the essential qualification notified in the advertisement as well as university statutes.

Quashing the appointments given to those candidates who were not eligible in terms of prescribed qualification, the court observed that, “ Since academic council of university never passed any order, relating to equivalence and word “equivalent” was not specifically used in advertisement, Selection Committee had no power to change the selection criteria midway that too by permitting the candidates not having requisite qualification in terms of eligibility criteria to produce equivalence certificate to show that their qualification was equivalent to the requisite/prescribed qualification.”

Allowing the petition filed in this regard the court directed the university to offer appointment to the petitioner against the posts in question.