Question Of Equivalence Of Qualification For Employment Eligibility Is Decided By The Employer, And Not The Courts: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court dismissed an Appeal challenging the rejection of the candidature for a post published by the UPSSSC.
The Allahabad High Court has held the question of equivalence of qualification for employment eligibility is decided by the employer, and not the Courts.
The Court dismissed a Special Appeal filed by the Appellant challenging the rejection of his candidature for the post of Instructor in Sewing Technology by the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission (UPSSSC). The Appeal was filed under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, against the judgment of a Single Bench that had dismissed the Appellant’s writ petition challenging an order by the UPSSSC.
A Division Bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi held that “as per the law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the question of equivalence of qualification in the matter of examining the eligibility for the purpose of employment, is to be decided by the employer and the Courts cannot treat any qualification to be equivalent to the qualifications prescribed in the Rules and mentioned in the advertisement. In case the appellant’s claim of equivalence of qualification is allowed, all other similarly situated persons, who did not apply as they did not possess the qualification prescribed by the Rules and mentioned in the advertisement, would suffer discrimination and injustice.”
Advocate Rishi Raj represented the Appellant, while Additional Chief Standing Counsel Prafulla Yadav appeared for the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The advertisement issued by the UPSSSC prescribed specific eligibility criteria for the post under the Uttar Pradesh Government Industrial Training Institutes (Instructors and Foreman Instructors) Service Rules, 2021 (2021 Rules).
The Appellant, holding a three-year Diploma in Textile Technology from the U.P. Technical Education Board, also possessed a National Craft Instructor Certificate in the trade of Cutting and Sewing issued by the National Council for Vocational Training. His candidature was rejected on the ground that he did not meet the prescribed qualifications
Court’s Reasoning
The Bench noted that the advertisement provided that the eligibility qualification would be as per the 2021 Rules, which mentioned a two years’ Diploma in Garment Fabrication Technology/Costume Design & Dress making from a recognised Board of Technical Education or relevant Advanced Diploma (Vocational) from D.G.T. with two years’ experience in the relevant field. “The appellant does not possess any of the aforesaid qualifications,” it further noted.
“Although, the advertisement mentioned that a candidate should have passed the High School examination conducted by the U.P. Intermediate Education Board or any other examination recognized by the State Government as equivalent thereto, the clause of equivalence is not there in respect of the qualification of Diploma. Therefore, any person claiming to possess any qualification equivalent to a Diploma in Garment Fabrication Technology/Costume Design & Dress Making or NTC/NAC passed in the trade of “Sewing Technology”, would not be eligible to apply against the advertisement,” the Court explained.
Consequently, the Court held, “Therefore, we find ourselves in complete agreement with the view taken by Hon’ble Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Saurabh Saxena v. Union Of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC-LKO:2355-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Rishi Raj and Garv Saxena
Respondents: Additional Chief Standing Counsel Prafulla Yadav; Advocates Anand Dwivedi, Gaurav Mehrotra and S.M. Singh Royekwar
