AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sudhanshu Dhulia, CJ
Heard Mr. A. Ali, learned counsel for the writ appellant/writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government
Advocate for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3.
The writ appellant before this Court has appealed against the order of the learned Single Judge (dated 11.02.2021), which was passed in WP(C)
No.747/2021, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition as the Court did not find the petitioner eligible for undergoing one year
training course in Veterinary Science.
One of the essential conditions for getting one year training was that a candidate must not be more than thirty years of age as on 1st January, 2017,
and the candidates must have passed Higher Secondary in “Scienceâ€. Admittedly, the writ appellant/writ petitioner does not possess both these
criteria/qualifications. He was over-aged and did not have “Science†in his Higher Secondary. His only case before the learned Single Judge was
that in a similar petition which was filed before the learned Single Judge where the petitioners were similarly situated, relief was granted to the
petitioners therein. Therefore, it was prayed that the same relief be granted to him as well. The learned Single Judge, however, differentiated at two
situations and came to the conclusions that the relief so granted in the earlier writ petition was because the condition that the candidate being not more
than thirty years and must have done “Scienceâ€, were conditions which were to come into effect only from the date of publication in the Official
Gazette, which was 19th August, 2017. Since the exercise predated 19.08.2017, the benefit was granted.
This is not the case at hand.
In the case of the present writ appellant/writ petitioner, it is for the Department to fix eligibility as well as qualifications and it is not the domain of
this to Court set qualifications. Only interference can be done to any procedural anomaly. In the present case there is none.
In view of the above, we find no merit in the writ appeal and the same stands dismissed.