Chandramani S/O Rajbali Dhuria and 14 Others v. the Union of India, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and 4 Others

Bombay HC15 Mar 2012WP/1062/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging qualification requirements for Food Safety Officer and Food Analyst posts. Court held prescribing qualifications is for respondent authorities and granted no relief, directing respondents to decide on representations. Petition rejected.

What the court decided

AI extract

Chandramani S/O Rajbali Dhuria and 14 Others Vs the… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1062 OF 2012

¶4

CHANDRAMANI RAJBALI DHURIA AND OTHERS VERSUS

¶5

UNION OF INDIA, THRU. ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, NEW DELHI AND OTHERS

¶6

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

¶8

Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶9

Mr. D. P. Thakre, A.G.P. for respondent nos.4 and 5.

¶10

CORAM : S. A. BOBDE AND P. B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : 15^th MARCH, 2012.

¶11

By this petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to include the qualification of Degree in Pharmacy as one of the qualifications for the posts of Food Safety Officer and Food Analyst in Rules 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.4.1, respectively, of the Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011.

¶12

In Our view, the respondent authorities are the best judges for prescribing the qualifications and it would not be proper for this Court to prescribe the qualifications. Therefore, such prayer cannot be granted.

¶13

In the alternative, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the provisions of Rules 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.4.1. of the Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011 be held as arbitrary to the extent that they do not recognize the qualification of Degree in Pharmacy for the posts of Food Safety Officer and

¶14

¶15

Food Analyst. This prayer also cannot be granted for the afore-stated reason.

¶16

Lastly, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that if respondents consider the course of Pharmacy as a equivalent to the already existing qualification for the posts of Food Safety Officer and Food Analyst, then they can include the same.

¶17

There is no doubt about this power of the respondents. However, we are not inclined to grant any of the reliefs by a writ of mandamus.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have made representations dated 18.01.2010, 19.01.2010 and 23.01.2010 (annexed at Annexures-B, C, & D to the petition) to respondent no.2.

¶19

In the circumstances, the respondents are at liberty to decide the representations made by the petitioners and communicate the decision to them.

¶20

The writ petition is accordingly rejected. No

costs.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Diwale

Chandramani S/O Rajbali Dhuria and 14 Others v. the Union of India, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Chandramani S/O Rajbali Dhuria and 14 Others v. the Union of India, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kokila W/O Nitish Kotak and 3 Ors. Vs Union Bank of India

Indrayani D/O Narayanrao Lokhande W/O Chotelal Bhagirath Yadav Vs the Divsnl Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee NO.1, and Anr.

Satish S/O Utamrao Dahatonde and 2 Others Vs the Deputy Director of Education, Amravati Division and Another

Miss. Sarita M. Waghmare Vs Dy.Director of Edn., Nagpur Division and Ohters

Buldhana District P.W.D.Det. Irri. Vs State of Maharashtra and Another.

Ku. Sunanda Natthuji Mohod Vs the C.E.O. Zp, Chandrapur and Anr.