MAHESHWAR PRASAD SRIVASTAVA & ANR. versus SURESH SINGH AND ORS.

MAHESHWAR PRASAD SRIVASTAVA & ANR. versus SURESH SINGH AND ORS.

'Post-graduate training' as required by Rule 49(c) of the Drugs (and Cosmetics) Rules, 1945 denotes the timing of the training—namely, that it is to be obtained after graduation in medicine or science under prescribed authorities, rather than limiting eligibility to candidates trained through post-graduate institutions. The appellants, having received systematic training in eligible laboratories after graduation, satisfy the qualification requirements for appointment as Drugs Inspectors.

Parties
Appellant: Maheshwar Prasad Srivastava; Appellants: Appellants in C. A. 603/75; Respondent No. 1: Suresh Singh; Respondents: Respondent No. 2 in C. A. 603 and Respondents 2 and 3 in C. A. 602
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 March 1976
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment of the Patna High Court
Outcome
Appeals allowed. Judgment of the High Court set aside. Appointments of appellants as Drugs Inspectors held lawful and valid.
Legal Topics
Qualifications for Appointment, Public Service Commission Discretion, Interpretation of Statutes
Administrative Law Employment Law Qualifications for Appointment Public Service Commission Discretion Interpretation of Statutes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maheshwar Prasad Srivastava

Appellant

Appellants in C. A. 603/75

Appellants

Suresh Singh

Respondent No. 1

Respondent No. 2 in C. A. 603 and Respondents 2 and 3 in C. A. 602

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment of the Patna High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Interpretation of 'post-graduate training' under Rule 49(c) of the Drugs (and Cosmetics) Rules, 1945 for the eligibility of Drugs Inspectors
  2. 2 Whether the appellants possessed the requisite qualifications for appointment as Drugs Inspectors

Ratio Decidendi

'Post-graduate training' as required by Rule 49(c) of the Drugs (and Cosmetics) Rules, 1945 denotes the timing of the training—namely, that it is to be obtained after graduation in medicine or science under prescribed authorities, rather than limiting eligibility to candidates trained through post-graduate institutions. The appellants, having received systematic training in eligible laboratories after graduation, satisfy the qualification requirements for appointment as Drugs Inspectors.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed. Judgment of the High Court set aside. Appointments of appellants as Drugs Inspectors held lawful and valid.

Orders

  • Appeals allowed.
  • Judgment of the High Court set aside.