Summary
Candidates holding degrees in particular branches of history challenged cancellation of their selection for postgraduate and graduate trained history teaching posts. The Court held that the advertisements required the prescribed qualification in History as a whole. It upheld the rejection following document verification and consideration by experts, declining to substitute judicial views on academic equivalence. All appeals were dismissed without costs.
Issues
- Whether degrees in branches of history satisfied the advertised qualification in History for the teaching posts.
- Whether judicial intervention was warranted in the assessment of academic eligibility and equivalence.
Held
- The advertised qualification was History as a whole. Degrees in Ancient History, Ancient History and Culture, or Medieval and Modern History did not satisfy that requirement merely because they concerned a branch of the subject. Graduate trained applicants also had to meet the separately prescribed Political Science requirement. (¶¶ 6, 6.1)
- Academic qualifications and equivalence normally belong to the recruiting institution and expert bodies. The expert consideration and the High Court’s assessment furnished no ground for the Court to substitute its own view in these cases. (¶¶ 6.1, 6.4, 6.5)
- The advertisements were unambiguous and their prescribed educational qualifications could not be departed from. Passing the written examination did not establish eligibility where document verification disclosed the deficiency; reasons and an opportunity to respond had preceded rejection. (¶¶ 6.6, 6.7)
- The decision concerning the combined History/Civics post involved a different controversy and had itself been stayed in appeal. It did not establish eligibility of candidates with degrees confined to branches of History. (¶ 6.2)
Result
All appeals dismissed without costs; cancellation of the appellants’ candidatures was upheld.