Allowed

Reena Naulia and Others v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Uttarakhand HC29 Jul 2013WPSS/476/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that a degree in 'Agriculture and Animal Husbandry' is equivalent to a 'Bachelor in Agriculture' for recruitment purposes. Petitioners challenging the rejection of their degrees by the Public Service Commission on nomenclature grounds were successful, and their results were ordered to be declared.

What did the court decide?

The degree of B.Sc. Agriculture and Animal Husbandry possessed by the petitioners shall be taken as a qualification under Rule 8 of 1979 Rules and the State Public Service Commission shall declare the

Reena Naulia and Others Vs State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Uttarakhand HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION (S/S) No. 476 of 2013

¶2

Reena Naulia and others ………….Petitioners

¶3

Versus

¶4

State of Uttarakhand and others ……...Respondents.

¶5

And

¶6

WRIT PETITION (S/S) No. 491 of 2013

¶7

Mahesh Prasad and another ………….Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Uttarakhand and others ……...Respondents.

¶10

Present : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate with Mr. Atul Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

¶11

Mr. B.D. Kandpal, Advocate for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission.

¶12

Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. G.D. Joshi, Advocate for Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology.

¶13

Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

¶14

By means of these writ petitions, the petitioners have raised similar grievance and hence both these petitions are being decided together by means of this common order. The facts and the dates, which have been mentioned by and large pertain to Writ Petition (S/S) No. 476 of 2013, but it is only for the sake of convenience.

¶15

The petitioners appeared in an examination known as Combined Lower Subordinate Services Examination, 2010 which was conducted by State Public Service Commission. The said examination was conducted for various posts in different departments including that of Cane Development Department where the posts were of Senior Cane Development Inspector and Cane Development Inspector. One of the essential

¶16

¶17

qualifications for appointment as a Senior Cane Development Inspector as well as Cane Development Inspector is Bachelor’s degree in Agriculture as per Rule 8 of Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Cane (Group I and II General) Services Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 1979 Rules). Rule 8 of 1979 Rules reads as under : “ 8. Academic qualifications. – (1) A candidate for direct recruitment to the various post in the service must possess a Bachelor’s degree in Agriculture.

¶18

(2) A candidate who possesses Master’s degree in Agriculture Science shall, other things being equal, be given preference in the matter of direct Recruitment to Group I – General and Group II – General posts.”

¶19

Therefore, one of the essential qualifications for appointment as Senior Cane Development Inspector or Cane Development Inspector is Bachelor’s degree in Agriculture. The petitioners are candidates for the post of Senior Cane Development Inspector as well as Cane Development Inspector and have a degree known as Bachelor’s in “Agriculture and Animal Husbandry” which they have done from the University known as G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology in the year 1997-98. However, their degree in Agriculture and Animal Husbandry is not being considered by Public Service Commission as a Bachelor’s degree in Agriculture for the simple reason that according to the State Public Service Commission the requirement of Rule 8 of 1979 Rules is that one must be a Bachelor in “Agriculture” and though the petitioners may be Bachelor in “Agriculture and Animal Husbandry”, their degree does not specifically state that they are Bachelor in “Agriculture”!

¶20

Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology is also a party before this Court. In the

¶21

¶22

counter affidavit, they have said that there is absolutely no difference between the two degrees as between 1960 to 1998 the University was giving the degree known as B.Sc. “Agriculture and Animal Husbandry” and after 1998-99 the same degree given by the University is known as B.Sc. “Agriculture”. Therefore, the difference, if any, is only in nomenclature as earlier the B.Sc. in Agriculture was known as B.Sc. in Agriculture and Animal Husbandry. The course curriculum and the subjects are absolutely the same.

¶23

In view of the above, non-consideration of the degree of B.Sc. Agriculture and Animal Husbandry as equivalent to that of B.Sc. Agriculture by State Public Service Commission is on absolutely wrong notions and misplaced logic regarding the two degrees.

¶24

Writ petition succeeds to that extent. The degree of B.Sc. Agriculture and Animal Husbandry possessed by the petitioners shall be taken to be a qualification as per Rule 8 of 1979 Rules and thereafter the State Public Service Commission, considering the marks obtained by the petitioners in the examination, shall declare their result forthwith.

¶25

Both the writ petitions are allowed in the above terms.

¶26

No order as to costs.

¶27

(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)

¶28

29.7.2013 Avneet

Reena Naulia and Others v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reena Naulia and Others v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Singh Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Vijay Prakash Saxena Vs State and Ors.

Smt Sarla Devi Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Chander Pal Singh Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Keshav Datt Tiwari and Others Vs State and Another

Sher Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others