1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2516 of 2023 1 - Mahesh Kumar Sahu S/o Chandan Ram Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Gujara, Post Riwa, Tahsil Arang, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Public Instructions Sanchalnalaya, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Deputy Director Public Instructions Sanchalnalaya, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - University Grants Commission Through Its Vice Chancellor, Bahadurshah Jafar Marg, New Delhi – 110002. 5 - Haridyesh Kumar S/o Uma Kumar R/o H.C. C H 18 Katainar City Korba, P.O. Bankimongra, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ku Seema Yadav Posted As Lecturer (Commerce) At Higher Secondary School Kikirda, Block - Jaijaipur, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Panel Lawyer For Resp. No. 4 : Mr. J. N. Nande, Advocate For Resp. No. 5 : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate For Resp. No. 6 : Mr. Alik Kumar Dewangan, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17.10.2025 Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 1. Following reliefs have been sought for by the petitioner in this petition: “(10.1) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to qualified petitioner possesses two degrees in one academic year such as Master of Commerce and Bachelor of Education ("B.Ed.") simultaneously. (10.2) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to issue an appointment order on the post of Lecturer 'Commerce' in favour of petitioner. (10.3) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order 04.11.2020. (P/2) (10.4) Grant any other writ(s), order(s), relief(s) in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that on 09.03.2019, the Directorate of Public Instruction issued an advertisement for a total of 14,580 posts for lecturers, teachers, and assistant teachers under ‘E’ and other cadres for various subjects. The petitioner, finding herself eligible for the post of Lecturer in Commerce, applied accordingly. Importantly, the recruitment process was governed by a notification published in the Chhattisgarh Official Gazette dated 05.03.2019, which clearly outlined the educational qualifications required for the post of Lecturer. The petitioner meets the prescribed qualifications and should therefore be considered eligible. The petitioner completed 3 a Master of Commerce degree through an Open and Distance Learning program between June 2013 and June 2014. Additionally, he enrolled as a regular student in the B.Ed. course in 2012 and appeared for the examination in 2013. The petitioner passed the written examination and was called for document verification, which took place on 04.11.2020. However, during this process, the petitioner was declared disqualified for the post of Lecturer in Commerce on the grounds that she possessed two degrees earned in the same academic year, Master of Commerce and Bachelor of Education. Challenging this order, the petitioner filed a writ petition registered as WPS 266/2020 (Mahesh Kumar Sahu v. State of C.G). On 26.07.2022, this Court passed an order granting the petitioner liberty to file a representation. It was directed that if the petitioner filed such a representation, it should be considered and decided by the respondent authorities within six weeks. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent authority, which was rejected on the ground that re-verification of documents cannot be undertaken once the initial verification and decision have been completed. Further, a notification dated 02.05.2022 issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) recognizes the Dual Degree Programme. According to this notification, a Dual Degree Programme is jointly designed and offered by Indian and foreign higher education institutions in the same disciplines and at the same level, with degrees conferred separately and simultaneously upon fulfillment of requirements. This shall not be construed as two separate 4 degrees pursued simultaneously. The UGC further mandates conformity with prescribed nomenclature, duration, and eligibility standards. Additionally, the UGC issues guidelines for eligibility of joint and dual degree programmes. It is also relevant to highlight that similarly situated candidates who possessed simultaneous postgraduate degrees have been appointed to posts. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Directorate of Public Instruction issued an advertisement dated 09.03.2019 for a total of 14,580 posts for lecturers, teachers, and assistant teachers under the 'E' and other cadres for various subjects. The petitioner, being eligible for the post of Lecturer in Commerce, duly applied for the same. It is crucial to highlight that the recruitment process was governed by the Chhattisgarh Official Gazette notification dated 05.03.2019, which clearly prescribed the educational qualifications required for appointment to the post of Lecturer. The petitioner possesses the requisite qualifications and is therefore entitled to be considered eligible for the post of Lecturer (Commerce). The petitioner completed a Master of Commerce degree through an Open and Distance Learning Programme between June-July 2013 and June 2014. Additionally, the petitioner was enrolled as a regular student in the B.Ed. course in 2012 and appeared for the examination in 2013. Having passed the written examination, the petitioner was called for document verification on 04.11.2020 before the respondent authority. However, the petitioner was unjustly declared disqualified on the ground that she held two degrees, Master of 5 Commerce and Bachelor of Education, obtained in the same academic year. Challenging this disqualification, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court, registered as WPS 266/2020 (Mahesh Kumar Sahu v. State of C.G). By order dated 26.07.2022, this Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a representation, directing that the same be considered and decided by the respondent authorities within six weeks of its receipt. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a representation, which was rejected on the ground that re-verification of documents is not permissible once the initial verification and decision have been made. Furthermore, the petitioner draws attention to the notification of University Grants Commission dated 02.05.2022, which recognizes Dual Degree Programmes. These programmes involve degrees conferred jointly by Indian and foreign higher education institutions and are treated as a single integrated programme rather than two separate degrees pursued simultaneously. The University Grants Commission (UGC) also formally offers Joint and Dual Degree Programmes, confirming the eligibility of dual degrees for academic and professional purposes. Lastly, it is pertinent to note that similarly situated candidates, such as Hridyesh Kumar and Ku. Seema Yadav, possessing comparable degrees obtained simultaneously, have been appointed. 3. On the other hand, supporting the order impugned to be just and proper counsel appearing for the respondents jointly submits that the disqualification of petitioner was rightly upheld as per the clear 6 terms of the recruitment advertisement and the Chhattisgarh Official Gazette notification dated 05.03.2019, which mandate that candidates must not possess two degrees obtained simultaneously in the same academic year for the post of Lecturer. The possession of petitioner of Master of Commerce and B.Ed. degrees in the same academic year violates this explicit eligibility criterion. Further, the reliance placed by petitioner on the notification of University Grants Commission on Dual Degree Programmes is misplaced, as the qualifications of petitioner do not fall within the ambit of such recognized dual degree courses. The petitioner pursued two separate courses independently, not a joint or integrated programme as defined by the UGC. The respondents also contend that the document verification process was conducted in accordance with the rules, and once the verification was completed and the petitioner declared ineligible, no further re-verification is permissible under law. 4. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. The eligibility criteria prescribed for appointment of Lecturer (Commerce) reads as under: “(चार) व㕍याखᙍयाता कᔿ सी मान⡍यता ्䵚ा्䵎 कᔿ्䵫कᔿ्䵕ालय / संस㡍थान से कᔿतीय ्䵦ेणी मे䜂 कᔿनम⹍नल㈿लल㈿ त कᔿषयो䬂 मे䜂 से कᔿ सी ए कᔿषय मे䜂 स㡍नात ो्䵈र / सम ्䵌 एं बी.एड. स.्䵅. कᔿषय कᔿषय समूह (1) (2) (3) 7 1 अं्䵇ेजी अं्䵇ेजी 2 भौत␿त ी भौत␿त ी/इलेकᕍट्䴰ॉकᔿनकᕍस/एप⩍लाइड भौत␿त ी / न⡍यूकᔿ9यर भौत␿त ी 3 रसायन रसायन / बायो े मेस㡍ट्䴰ी 4 जी कᔿ्䴺ान नस㡍पत␿तशाኚ验 / ्䵚ाणीशाኚ验 / लाइफसाइन⡍स / जैकᔿ ी/अनुांश㘿श ी (जेनेकᔿटकᕍस) / सूቌ䲚मजैकᔿ ी (माइ ोबायोलॉजी) / जै्䵚ो्䵕ोकᔿC ी (बायोटेकᕍनॉलाजी) / आणकᔿ जीकᔿ्䴺ान (माल㈿ल ु लर बायोलॉजी) पादप ा቟後य ी (प⩍लान⡍ट कᔿफज᰿जयोलॉजी) तथा स㡍नात स㡍तर मे䜂 ्䵚ाणीशाኚ验 अथा नस㡍पत␿त शाኚ验 कᔿषय रहा हो। 5 ाश㘿णजᱍय ए ाउन⡍टेसी सकᔿहत ाश㘿णजᱍय / ास㡍ट ए ाउि㼡टC/फाइनेበ悌न⡍सयल ए ाउन⡍टे䜂सी मुखᙍय कᔿषय े रあप मे䜂 रहा हो। 6 Cश㘿णत Cश㘿णत/एप⩍लाईड Cश㘿णत 6. The rejection of the candidature of petitioner’ is solely based on the ground that she has obtained two degrees in the same academic year, namely, Master of Commerce and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.). However, the advertisement dated 09.03.2019 issued by the Directorate of Public Instruction does not specify that a candidate who has obtained two degrees in the same academic year is disqualified from consideration for appointment to the post of Lecturer (Commerce). 7. Submission made by learned State counsel that the petitioner is ineligible unless her graduation is specifically in Commerce is neither proper nor justified. The sole reason recorded in the impugned order for disqualification is that the petitioner holds two degrees simultaneously in one academic year. The State cannot improve its case by raising new grounds beyond the reasons 8 mentioned in the impugned order during the course of arguments, as held by the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr. vs The Chief Election Commissioner [(1978) 1 SCC 405]. Therefore, the contention of the State counsel is rejected, and the impugned order dated 04.11.2020 disqualifying the petitioner is set aside. 8. The respondents are accordingly directed to consider the petitioner’s case for appointment to the post of Lecturer (Commerce) afresh and pass an appropriate order within sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 9. The petition is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna Judge