JUDGMENT
Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.
1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 7th August, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. In the said writ petition, the appellant has impugned the order of cancellation of the offer of appointment of the appellant to the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) after having successfully passed the written test conducted by the Delhi Subordinate Selection Board (for short ‘DSSB’)
2. The grievance raised before us by the counsel for the appellant is that though the appellant meets the qualifications as advertised and mentioned in the Recruitment Rules, yet the respondent proceeded to cancel her offer of appointment on the ground that she does not possess the required qualifications for being appointed as a Assistant Teacher (Primary) according to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi Recruitment Rules.
3. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short ‘MCD’) had issued an advertisement for filling up the posts of 712 primary teachers’ post. In the said advertisement, it was specifically mentioned that the minimum academic and professional qualifications required for appointment are:
(i) Senior Secondary School Certificate or Intermediate or its equivalent; and
(ii) Diploma or certificate in basic teachers’ training of a duration of not less than two years.
or
Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.)
4. The Recruitment Rules also prescribe the same qualifications.
5. The dispute which is raised in the present appeal as also in the writ petition is as to whether or not the appellant possesses a diploma or certificate in basic teachers’ training of a duration of not less than two years. Counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the letter dated 21st July, 2003 and on the basis thereof it is sought to be submitted that the appellant possesses a diploma in basic teachers’ training. We have perused the said letter on which reliance is placed i.e. the letter dated 21st July, 2003. The said letter itself specifically states that the concerned programme would be run on full time basis but would be of a duration of six months. As stated above, it was clearly mentioned in the advertisement taken out by the respondent that the diploma course or the certificate course should not be of less than 2 years duration.
6. It is not the case of the appellant that she has done a diploma in teachers’ training of duration of two years. The letter dated 21st July, 2003 also indicates that the aforesaid programme was undertaken in order to overcome the shortage of trained elementary teachers in U.P. The same, however, in no manner can change and modify the recruitment rules which are applicable to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. A candidate must meet the eligibility criteria mentioned in the Rules. The said rules of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi cannot undergo an amendment because of the letter dated 21st July, 2003, which is written by National Council for Teacher Education.
7. We find no infirmity in the order of the learned Single Judge. The appeal has no merits and it is accordingly dismissed. The application for condensation of delay is also accordingly disposed of.