SAJID KHAN versus L RAHMATHULLAH & ORS.

SAJID KHAN versus L RAHMATHULLAH & ORS.

Where the recruiting authority, after scrutiny and on the basis of a prior clarification from the Directorate of Technical Education, treated Diploma in Electrical and Electronics Engineering as equivalent to Diploma in Electrical Engineering and there was no convincing material before the courts to show that the acceptance was illegal or arbitrary, courts should not set aside appointments; consequently the High Court and CAT orders setting aside the appointments were unsustainable and appeals by the appointed candidates were allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Sajid Khan; Respondent(s): L Rahmathullah & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Equivalence of Qualifications, Qualification Prescribed in Notification, Judicial Review of Recruitment, Appointments and Selection

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sajid Khan

Appellant

L Rahmathullah & Ors.

Respondent(s)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' Diploma in Electrical and Electronics Engineering met the qualification prescribed in the recruitment notification for Junior Engineer (Electrical) as equivalent to Diploma in Electrical Engineering
  2. 2 Whether the courts should interfere with the employer's decision recognizing equivalence of qualifications absent convincing evidence of arbitrariness

Ratio Decidendi

Where the recruiting authority, after scrutiny and on the basis of a prior clarification from the Directorate of Technical Education, treated Diploma in Electrical and Electronics Engineering as equivalent to Diploma in Electrical Engineering and there was no convincing material before the courts to show that the acceptance was illegal or arbitrary, courts should not set aside appointments; consequently the High Court and CAT orders setting aside the appointments were unsustainable and appeals by the appointed candidates were allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 20.11.2014 of the High Court in Writ Petition Nos. 15398 of 2010, 6014 of 2010, 14891 of 2010 and OP (CAT) No.1305 of 2010
  • Allow the appeals by the appointed candidates (appellants) and uphold their selection