Summary
The Supreme Court directed appointment of a selected psychologist wrongly rejected for lacking an L.T./B.T./B.Ed qualification. The advertisement used a slash to state alternative Psychology qualifications, while the governing 1991 rules required an M.A. in Psychology and treated B.Ed or the stated diploma as preferential. The appellant held the required postgraduate degree. Statutory recruitment rules prevailed over any inconsistent advertisement. Appointment was ordered within two months of production of the judgment.
Issues
- Whether the advertisement required a Psychology graduate also to possess teacher training.
- Whether the governing rules made the missing training qualification essential.
Provisions considered
- Schedule, Psychologist qualification entry, Janjatiya Vikas Shikshan Aur Karmcharivarg Sewa Niyamawali, 1991M.A. in Psychology was essential; B.Ed or the specified teaching diploma was preferential. The appellant satisfied the statutory requirement. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21, 22)
Held
- Read in its original Hindi and alongside other entries, the advertisement’s slash denoted alternatives, rather than cumulative qualifications. Each alternative was governed by the Psychology-subject prefix. The authorities and High Court wrongly required both graduation in Psychology and training. (¶¶ 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18)
- The admitted governing rules prescribed M.A. in Psychology, making B.Ed preferential rather than essential. The appellant’s postgraduate qualification met that rule. Any inconsistent part of the advertisement had to yield to statutory recruitment requirements. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21, 22)
- The post’s temporary dead-cadre classification had been followed by revival; the later 2009 rules did not govern the 2001 recruitment. The selected appellant was illegally denied appointment and the respondents had to issue the appointment order within two months after a copy of the judgment was produced. (¶¶ 23, 24, 25)
Result
Appeals allowed; High Court judgments set aside. Respondents directed to appoint the appellant as Psychologist pursuant to the 2001 selection within two months of production of the judgment.