JUDGMENT
Permod Kohli, J.
1. Stipulation of Math at graduate level with qualification of Physical Chemistry for the post of Lecturer advertised by the University of Jammu vide its Advertisement Notice dated 22.9.2003, has been challenged in the present petition. Petitioner has acquired degree in M.Sc. Chemistry and also Ph.D in Physical Chemistry from the University of Jammu. The University of Jammu issued above mentioned Advertisement Notice wherein qualification was prescribed for the post of Lecturer in Physical Chemistry as M.Sc. Physical Chemistry with Math at graduate level. Petitioner’s claim is that for acquiring Post Graduation in Physical Chemistry, any candidate who has passed graduation with medical subjects or non-medical subjects and Chemistry being one of such subjects, is eligible to seek admission in Post Graduation course (M.Sc. in Physical Chemistry) and similarly a person who has acquired qualification of M.Sc. in Physical Chemistry, is entitled to undertake research work for Ph.D. Therefore, for the post of Lecturer in Physical Chemistry, additional qualification prescribed that the candidates should have studied Math at graduate level, is contrary to law. According to petitioner, such prescription of condition/ stipulation is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, as it makes distinction between a student having Post Graduation to his credit with Math and other subjects . It is contended on behalf of petitioner that such a condition is violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner, as the same is operating harshly and in a discriminatory manner. There is no nexus with the object sought to be achieved.
2. On being put to notice, University of Jammu has filed its detailed objections and pleaded that the Departmental Affairs Committee of the Department of Chemistry on consideration of the specialization of subject, recommended for prescription of the qualification i.e. Physical Chemistry with Math at graduate level so as to ensure that the requisite instructions are imparted to the students and excellency is achieved in the desired field In the wisdom of the University, the teaching of Physical Chemistry requires a mathematical mind, aptitude and knowledge from the beginning . It is further stated that the syllabus for the students at Master’s Degree Level in Chemistry pertains to various branches of mathematics, which, inter alia, include Vectors, Matrix Algebra, Permutations and Combinations, Probability, Root mean squares and most probable errors, Variable separable and first order Different equations, Differential calculus, integral calculus, which can be taught only by a teacher who has studied Math at graduate level. According to respondents, on the recommendations of the Departmental Affairs Committee, the Head of the Department of Chemistry, recommended to the Registrar and under the orders of the Vice Chancellor, the qualifications have been prescribed for the post of Lecturer in Physical Chemistry. Respondents have also referred to earlier notification issued by the University dated 24.2.2001 wherein same qualification was prescribed and it is not for the first time that such a qualification has been introduced.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Jagjit Rai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon Gazula Dasaratha Rama Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. reported in, AIR SC 564 and in J. Pandurangarao etc v. The Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, Hyderabad and Anr. reported as, AIR 1963 SC 268; and vehemently argued that the impugned stipulation makes classification between the persons possessing degree in Physical Chemistry with medical subjects and non medical subjects . According to him, both the candidates possessing Post Graduate Degree/Ph.D in Physical Chemistry with Math and without Math should have been eligible for applying for the post in question, as they have acquired all knowledge relating to Physical Chemistry at Post Graduate and Ph.D. level.
4. Mr. J.P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondents has submitted that the issue was fully considered by the Departmental Affairs Committee, which is an Expert Body and the same having been approved by the Head of the Department and Vice Chancellor, cannot be re-examined by the court.
5. It is settled proposition of law that the prescription of qualification and eligibility criteria is within the realm of the executing authority and or the expert body. The court has no expertise to examine whether prescription of particular qualification /criteria, is required for any particular job or not. Such a issue is not justiciable. The Apex Court time and again has considered such an issue in J. Ranga Swami v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. reported in, AIR 1990 SC 535 and held :
“…. The plea of the petitioner is that, for efficient discharge of the duties of the post in question, the diploma in radiological physics (as applied in Medicine) from the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) held by him is more relevant than a doctorate in nuclear physics. It is submitted that in all corresponding posts elsewhere, a diploma in radiological physics insisted upon and that, even in the State of Andhra Pradesh, all other physicists working in the line, except the respondent, have the diploma of the BARC. It is not for the’ court to consider the relevance of qualifications prescribed for various posts. The post in question is that of a Professor and the prescription of a doctorate as a necessary qualification therefore is nothing unusual. Petitioner also stated before us that to the best of his knowledge, there is no doctorate course anywhere in India in radiological physics. That is perhaps why a doctorate in nuclear physics has been prescribed. There is nothing prima facie preposterous about this requirements. It is not for us to assess the comparative merits of such a doctorate and the BARC diploma held by the petitioner and decide or direct what should be the qualifications to be prescribed for the post in question…”
Similarly, in P. U. Joshi and Ors. v. Accountant General, Ahmedabad and Ors. reported in, 2003 AIR SCW 272, the Apex Court held as under :
“Questions relating to the constitution, pattern, nomenclature of posts, cadres, categories, their creation /abolition, prescription of qualifications and other conditions of service including avenues of promotions and criteria to be fulfilled for such promotions pertain to the field of policy and within the exclusive discretion and jurisdiction of the State, subject, or course, to the limitations of restrictions envisaged in the Constitution of India and it is not for the Statutory Tribunals, at any rate, to direct the Government to have particular method of recruitment or eligibility criteria or avenues of promotion or impose itself by substituting its views for that of the State..”
6. The University, which is a expert body having considered the matter and prescribed qualification for the post of Lecturer in Physical Chemistry, it is not for this Court to substitute its opinion, it having no expertise in the field.
7. In this view of the matter, no direction can be issued by the court to prescribe or not to prescribe any condition, stipulation or qualification for the post in question . This petition is accordingly dismissed in limine.
