PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: RAVI SHANKAR & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/02/1998 BENCH: G.B. PATTANAIK, M. SRINIVASAN ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
This appeal is directed against the judgment of the
Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi
dated 13.11.1992. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal had
called upon the appellants to consider the case of the
respondents, who admittedly possessed the qualification of
Vaidya Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad for
the post of Pharmacist after relaxing the qualification and
experience for the post whenever any future vacancy arises.
Mrs. Amreshwari, the learned senior counsel for the
appellants contends that a Vaidya Visharad recognised by
Hindi Sahitya Sammelan is not one of the recognised
qualifications for the post of Pharmacist and the minimum
qualification for a post cannot be relaxed and, therefore,
Tribunal was in error in directing to consider the case of
the respondents on relaxation of the qualification in
question. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other
hand, contended that the degree of Vaidya Visharad awarded
by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is recognised
qualification under the Central Government Health Scheme
Delhi (Group C) Ayurvedic, Recruitment Rules, 1978. In view
of the rival stand taken by the parties, the only question
that arises for consideration is whether the degree of
Vaidya Visharad awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan,
Allahabad can be held to be a recognised qualification
under the Recruitment Rules. Looking to the Schedule
attached to the Rules which prescribed the qualification, it
is apparent that it is `Vaidya Visharad’ which is awarded by
All India Ayurvedic Congress is recognised and it is only
Ayurved Ratna which is awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan
which is recognised. Therefore, the degree of Vaidya
Visharad awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, which is
possessed by the respondents cannot be held to be a
recognised qualification under the Recruitment Rules. It may
be stated that in the application before the Tribunal, the
respondents have categorically asserted that they possessed
the qualification of Vaidya Visharad recognised by Hindi
Sahitya Sammelan. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal
was wholly in error in directing consideration of the case
of the respondents in case of future vacancies against a
post of Pharmacist. The respondents do not possess the
requisite qualification under the Recruitment Rules. They
cannot have any right of appointment. The impugned judgment
of the Tribunal is set aside. The appeal is allowed, but
there will be no order as to costs.