Lalit Singh vs Union Of India & Ors.

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

In the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant had applied for the post of Data Processing Assistant Grade-A pursuant to Advertisement No. Phase-IX/2021, and after qualifying the written examination, was shortlisted for document verification. However, his candidature was subsequently rejected vide order dated 11.12.2023 on the ground of “Rejected (B.Sc. Physical Science)”.

Learned counsel contended that the rejection is unsustainable as the applicant possesses the requisite qualification prescribed in the advertisement and has studied Computer Science as a main subject throughout his graduation.

Learned counsel further contended that the applicant's college, under the University of Delhi, has also certified that he was a student of B.Sc. (Physical Science) Computer Science and had studied Physics, Computer Science and Mathematics as main subjects during all three years.

Learned counsel argued that the prescribed qualification does not mandate any particular nomenclature of degree and that the applicant possesses the requisite academic qualification in substance, apart from having studied subjects directly relevant to the post. Accordingly, it was submitted that rejection of his candidature merely on the nomenclature “B.Sc. Physical Science”, despite the applicant having studied Computer Science throughout the course and the college having duly certified the same, is arbitrary and contrary to the prescribed eligibility criteria.

Supporting the applicant’s case, learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision dated 10.08.2023 rendered by this Tribunal in OA No. 2421/2018 and batch.

Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents, submitted that the applicant does not possess the Essential Qualification prescribed for the post of Data Processing Assistant Grade-A. It was submitted that the Recruitment Rules require a Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Applications, Information Technology or Computer Science from a recognized University/Institute, whereas the applicant admittedly holds a degree in B.Sc. (Physical Science), which does not satisfy the prescribed qualification.

Learned counsel further submitted that the Essential Qualification has been prescribed in the Recruitment Rules framed by the User Department, keeping in view the nature and requirements of the post. ^{The Staff Selection Commission} Central Administrative Tribunal^{is only the recruiting agency and has no} role in framing, amending or relaxing the Recruitment Rules.

Learned counsel further submitted that the scrutiny of the applicant's educational qualification was undertaken by the User Department, which found his degree not relevant to the post and accordingly rejected his candidature. The SSC merely uploaded the rejection list on its website on the basis of the recommendation made by the User Department.

It was also submitted that the applicant's claim that he had studied certain Computer Science-related subjects during his B.Sc. (Physical Science) course cannot substitute the specific qualification prescribed under the Recruitment Rules. Eligibility has to be determined with reference to the qualification prescribed for the post and not on the basis of subjects allegedly studied as part of another degree.

It was further contended that the User Department, being responsible for the post and its Recruitment Rules, is a necessary party to the present proceedings; however, the concerned User Department has not been impleaded as a respondent.

Accordingly, learned counsel submitted that the rejection of the applicant's candidature was in accordance with the prescribed Essential Qualification and the Recruitment Rules.

In Rejoinder, learned counsel for the applicant submitting that out of 64 advertised vacancies, only 15 candidates were selected and 49 vacancies remained unfilled, and that even the selected candidates had not been issued appointment orders or joined the post.

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the pleadings available on record.

The short issue that arises for consideration is whether the applicant, holding a degree of B.Sc. (Physical Science), can be treated as possessing the Essential Qualification prescribed for the post of Data Processing Assistant Grade-A, which requires a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Applications or Information Technology or Computer Science from a recognized University or Institute.

Before proceeding further, it would be pertinent to quote the Recruitment Rules for the post in question:

The applicant's candidature was rejected at the stage of scrutiny/document verification on the ground that the degree possessed

by him was B.Sc. (Physical Science) and did not correspond to the qualification prescribed for the post. The applicant does not dispute the nomenclature of the degree awarded to him. His case essentially is that he had studied Computer Science as a subject during the course of his graduation and that the concerned college has certified that Computer Science was one of his main subjects.

We find that the Essential Qualification prescribed for the post is specific in nature. It requires a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Applications, Information Technology or Computer Science. The requirement, therefore, is not merely that the candidate should have studied certain subjects relating to computers or Computer Science ^{during gr}Central Administrative Tribunal^{aduation. The applicant admittedly possesses a degree in B.Sc.} (Physical Science). The fact that Computer Science was studied as one of the subjects during the said course cannot, by itself, convert the degree awarded to the applicant into a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science.

The certificate issued by the concerned college, relied upon by the applicant, also does not state that the applicant was awarded a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science. It only certifies that he was a student of B.Sc. (Physical Science) Computer Science and that Physics, Computer Science and Mathematics were studied as main subjects. Thus, the said

certificate cannot be treated as altering or enlarging the Essential Qualification prescribed in the Recruitment Rules.

We also find substance in the submission of the respondents that the Essential Qualification has been prescribed by the User Department under the applicable Recruitment Rules, having regard to the nature and requirements of the post. The Staff Selection Commission, being the recruiting agency, is required to conduct the recruitment in accordance with the qualifications prescribed by the User Department and cannot, on its own, relax or modify the prescribed qualification.

The contention of the applicant that out of 64 advertised vacancies only 15 candidates were selected and the remaining vacancies remained unfilled also does not advance his case. Availability of vacancies cannot dispense with the requirement of possessing the prescribed Essential Qualification. The applicant can claim appointment only upon establishing that he satisfies the eligibility conditions prescribed for the post.

Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance upon the decision dated 10.08.2023 rendered by this Tribunal in OA No. 2421/2018 and batch. We have carefully considered the said decision. However, the said decision turned on its own facts, particularly the

specific clarification issued by the Department of Computer Science, University of Delhi dated 22.03.2018 regarding equivalence of the relevant B.Sc. courses. In the present case, however, no such determination of equivalence of the applicant’s degree with the Essential Qualification prescribed for the post has been placed on record. The certificate issued by the applicant’s college, relied upon by him, merely indicates the subjects studied by the applicant during his graduation and does not certify that the degree awarded to him is equivalent to a Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Science, as required under the Recruitment Rules. The said certificate, therefore, cannot substitute the specific qualification prescribed for the post. The User Department, upon scrutiny of the applicant’s documents, has taken a specific decision rejecting his candidature for want of the prescribed qualification. The aforesaid decision, therefore, does not advance the applicant’s case.

In the circumstances, we find that the applicant has not established any illegality or arbitrariness in the rejection of his candidature. Merely because the applicant studied Computer Science as one of the subjects during his graduation, he cannot be treated as possessing the specific degree qualification prescribed for the post.

In view of the aforesaid analysis, the present Original Application is dismissed.

Pending M.A.s, if any, shall stand disposed of. No costs.