Early Times Report
JAMMU, Dec 3: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that a candidate who does not possess the prescribed diploma qualification cannot claim appointment to a regular post on the strength of contractual service or experience, upholding Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology (SKUAST-Kashmir)'s decision to declare a Female Nurse ineligible.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal filed by Hamida Jan challenging a 2020 judgment of a Single Judge which had refused to interfere with SKUAST's stand on her ineligibility for the post of Female Nurse advertised in 2015.
The Court recorded that SKUAST had issued Advertisement Notice No. 04 of 2015 on May 13, 2015 for the post of Female Nurse on regular temporary basis, prescribing 10+2 (Science) with Diploma in Nursing and three years' experience in a Government hospital or recognised nursing home as the essential qualification. Admittedly, the appellant did not possess a Diploma in Nursing.
Hamida Jan had, prior to the recruitment process, been engaged by SKUAST on a contractual basis as Female Nurse on a consolidated monthly remuneration of ?7,600 for one year. She approached the High Court through a series of writ petitions seeking continuation of her engagement and later claiming right to be considered for regular appointment.
To overcome the eligibility bar, she relied on a certificate allegedly issued on January 16, 2019 by the Principal, Government Medical College, Srinagar, stating that the FMPHW (Diploma) held by her was equivalent to a Diploma in Nursing. During verification, however, the Principal, GMC Srinagar, categorically informed the University on March 28, 2019 that no such equivalence certificate had been issued from his office.
SKUAST thereafter examined her case and, by Order No. 791(EST) of 2019 dated October 29, 2019, held her ineligible for the post for want of the requisite Diploma in Nursing, notwithstanding her contractual engagement and participation in the selection pursuant to interim court orders.
In appeal, it was argued on her behalf that having allowed her to work as Female Nurse and permitted her to sit in the selection process, the University was estopped from questioning her eligibility. It was also pleaded that her FMPHW qualification along with experience should be treated as equivalent to a Diploma in Nursing, and that she be accommodated against any available vacancy of Female Nurse.
Rejecting these submissions, the Division Bench held that the advertisement specifically demanded "Diploma in Nursing" and did not provide for any equivalent qualification. Courts, the Bench said, cannot rewrite the terms of an advertisement or direct an employer to treat some other qualification as equivalent when the employer itself has not so prescribed.
The judges further observed that permitting an ineligible candidate to enter the zone of selection or to secure appointment on the basis of experience alone would be contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution, as it would deny a fair opportunity to all other aspirants who actually possess the advertised qualification.
Finding no infirmity in the Single Judge's view, the Division Bench concluded that the appellant had "no enforceable right" to seek regular appointment to the post of Female Nurse in the absence of the mandated Diploma in Nursing, and dismissed the appeal, thereby affirming SKUAST-K's decision. (JNF)
|
