1 2026:CGHC:7616 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1663 of 2026 1 - Mukesh Kumar S/o Shri Bhaiya Ram, Aged About 24 Years R/o Khalhe Para, Village Lofandi, Post Lofandi , District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Engineer In Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Superintending Engineer, Kondagaon Circle, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) 4 - Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Cg- Vyapam), Through The Controller Of Examination Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Sector- 19, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Skill Development And Entrepreneurship, Director General Of Training, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi – 11001 6 - Khagendra Kumar Dhiwar, S/o Rampal Dhiwar R/o Rasauta, Tahsil Pamgarh, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) Presently Posted As Handpump Technician Office Of The Superintending Engineer, Phe Circle Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Kamlesh Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Additional Advocate General For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate For Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. Solicitor General 2 SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 11/02 /2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to produce entire records pertaining to the instant matter. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, setting-aside the impugned action of respondent authoriities whereby, the petitioner has been held ineligible and further to declare him eligible for the post of ‘Handpump Technician’ and to grant him appointment on the aforesaid post with the respondent department. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the selection of Respondent No. 6 (Khagendra Kumar Dhiwar) and also, the appointment order issued to the Respondent No. 6 (Khagendra Kumar Dhiwar) by the respondent department. 10.4 Pass such other writ(s), order(s), or direction (s) as this Honb’le Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Respondents/State had issued an advertisement dated 23.04.2025 (Annexure P/1) for appointment of Hand-pump Technicians for which, qualification prescribed as ‘Qualified Higher Secondary Examination or 10 + 2 examination and must have passed 02 years course certificate from Industrial Training Institute (I.T.I.) in Fitter Trade or Mechanical Trade or Motor Mechanical Trade, Tractor Mechanical Trade, Automobile Mechanic Trade, Machinist Trade. Preference will be given to Fitter Trade.’ According to the petitioner, his application was rejected without giving any information or opportunity of hearing and therefore, this writ petition is filed. In support of his contention, he places reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Laxmikant Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. reported in (2025) INSC 1385. 3 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents/State vehemently opposes the submission of counsel for the petitioner and would submit that from the documents enclosed along with the writ petition, it is appearing that the petitioner has obtained certificate of training in the trade of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Technician, whereas, the advertisement (Annexure P/1) is issued for appointment of Hand-pump Technician. It is also contended that in the advertisement (Annexure P/1), requisite qualification is specifically mentioned as the certificate from the concerned Industrial Training Institute in Fitter Trade or Mechanical Trade or Motor Mechanical Trade, Tractor Mechanical Trade, Automobile Mechanic Trade, Machinist Trade with further specification that the applicants of Fitter Trade will be given preference. Petitioner is not holding the certificate of the trade as mentioned in the advertisement (Annexure P/1) and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for consideration for appointment on the post of Hand-pump Technician. In support of his contention he places reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zahoor Ahmad Rather & Ors Vs. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad & Ors. reported in (2019) 2 SCC 404. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a trained technician of refrigeration and air conditioning which he had undergone from Industrial Training Institute, Koni, District – Bilaspur. It is for the employer to prescribe the qualification for appointment of an employee on a particular post and in the case at hand, the employer had specified, required qualification in the advertisement. Petitioner with open eyes, submitted his application and had not challenged the advertisement at the initial stage. Once the petitioner has participated in the recruitment proceedings then, he will not be permitted to challenge the prescribed qualification for appointment on 4 the post of Hand-pump Technician and to say that the training of the petitioner is similar to that of the training of Mechanist as mentioned in the requisite qualifications of the impugned advertisement (Annexure P/1). 6. In case of Bedanga Talukdar vs Saifudaullah Khan and others, reported in (2011) 12 SCC 85, Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed thus:- “30. A perusal of the advertisement in this case will clearly show that there was no power of relaxation. In our opinion, the High Court committed an error in directing that the condition with regard to the submission of the disability certificate either along with the application form or before appearing in the preliminary examination could be relaxed in the case of respondent No. 1. Such a course would not be permissible as it would violate the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 32.In the face of such conclusions, we have little hesitation in concluding that the conclusion recorded by the High Court is contrary to the facts and materials on the record. It is settled law that there can be no relaxation in the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement unless the power of relaxation is duly reserved in the relevant rules and/or in the advertisement. Even if there is a power of relaxation in the rules, the same would still have to be specifically indicated in the advertisement. In the present case, no such rule has been brought to our notice. In such circumstances, the High Court could not have issued the impugned direction to consider the claim of respondent No.1 on the basis of identity card submitted after the selection process was over, with the publication of the select list. 29. We have considered the entire matter in detail. In our opinion, it is too well settled to need any further reiteration that all appointments to public offices have to be made in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In other words, there must be no arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour being given to any candidate. ” Therefore, the selection process has to be conducted strictly in accordance with stipulated selection procedure as specifically mentioned in general conditions clause of advertisement. 5 7. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zahoor Ahmad (Supra) has observed thus:- “27. While prescribing the qualifications for a post, the State, as employer, may legitimately bear in mind several features including the nature of the job, the aptitudes requisite for the efficient discharge of duties, the functionality of a qualification and the content of the course of studies which leads up to the acquisition of a qualification. The State is entrusted with the authority to assess the needs of its public services. Exigencies of administration, it is trite law, fall within the domain of administrative decision-making. The State as a public employer may well take into account social perspectives that require the creation of job opportunities across the societal structure. All these are essentially matters of policy. Judicial review must tread warily. That is why the decision in Jyoti K.K. [Jyoti K.K. v. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 15 SCC 596 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 664] must be understood in the context of a specific statutory rule under which the holding of a higher qualification which presupposes the acquisition of a lower qualification was considered to be sufficient for the post. It was in the context of specific rule that the decision in Jyoti K.K. [Jyoti K.K. v. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 15 SCC 596 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 664] turned. 8. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the respective parties, facts and circumstances of the case and the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is evident that the advertisement was issued by the employer for the post of Handpump Technician specifically mentioning the requisite qualifications for appointment on the said post. Petitioner had submitted application and had not challenged the advertisement at the initial stage. After participating in the recruitment proceedings, he will not be permitted to challenge the prescribed qualification for appointment on the post of Hand-pump Technician only on the ground that the training of the petitioner is similar to that of the training of Mechanist which is similar to the the requisite qualifications of the impugned advertisement (Annexure P/1). 6 9. For the foregoing discussions, I do not find any illegality being committed by the Respondents/State in rejecting the application of the candidature of the petitioner and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the writ petition being bereft of merit and substance is liable to be and accordingly, dismissed. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY Date: 2026.02.17 12:15:10 +0530