SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- S. Rajendra Babu and S.N. Phukan, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 2251 of 1997. D/d. 31.3.1999.

State of Punjab & Ors. - Appellant

Versus

Suman Lata - Respondent

Constitution of India, Article 226 - Recruitment - Selection Committee - Respondent selected as an Arts and Crafts teacher and her qualification examined by a selection Committee which consisted of persons having sufficient experience in the field and knowledge of the Job requirements as well as of the requisite qualifications, District Education officer ought not to have cancelled the appointment - Held that High Court rightly allowed teacher's writ.

[Paras 4 and 5]

ORDER

S. Rajendra Babu, J. - The appellant is aggrieved by an order made by the High Court by which a direction was issued to the appellant to appoint the respondent to the post of Arts and Crafts Teacher. The circumstances in which the order under appeal in a writ petition came to be filed by the respondent are as follows:

An advertisement was issued for the posts of Arts and Crafts Teacher and Sewing Teacher. The qualification for the post of Arts and Crafts Teacher was matriculation with two years? diploma in Arts and Crafts and qualification for the Sewing Teacher was matriculation with two years? experience in Sewing & Stitching. The respondent applied for the post of Arts and Crafts Teacher. She was interviewed along with other candidates and she was selected to the post of Arts and Crafts Teacher. On being appointed by letter dated 11-11-1994, she reported to duty. On 6-12-1994, when the Headmaster of the School noticed that the respondent did not have the requisite qualification to be appointed for the post of Arts and Crafts Teacher he reported the matter to the District Education Officer who cancelled the appointment made earlier. That order was challenged in the writ petition. The High Court noticed as follows:

"After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, perusing the paper-book and the written statement, we find that the petitioner possesses the requisite qualifications which could make her eligible for appointment. As such, there was no justification in withdrawing the appointment letter."

2. On that basis, the High Court allowed the writ petition.

3. In this Court, learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that the respondent possesses only qualifications in needlework and she can be appointed only as a Sewing Teacher and she does not possess any qualification for Arts and Crafts Teacher. In the statement of objections filed before the High Court, in this regard, it is stated as follows:

"The qualifications for the posts of Arts and Crafts and Sewing Teacher are totally different. The qualification for the post of Arts and Crafts Teacher is matric with two years? diploma in Arts and Crafts and in the case of Sewing Teacher the qualification is matric with two years? Industrial Training along with one year Teachers? Training Course from the Industrial Department. Although the Sewing Teacher is included in the categories of C & V, but both categories have separate qualifications for posting as Arts and Crafts Teacher and Sewing Teacher."

4. When the Selection Committee which consists of persons with sufficient experience in that field with the knowledge of job requirements and necessary qualifications in this regard having examined the qualification possessed by the respondent selected the respondent as Arts and Crafts Teacher, the District Education Officer ought not have cancelled that appointment.

5. In that view of the matter, the view taken by the High Court appears to be correct. We do not see any reason to interfere with the order.

6. The civil appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.