Deepa v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 542 of 2021 Deepa D/o Salig Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o House No. 305, Near Khan Kirana Store, Vrinda Nagar, Camp-1, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Director, Directorate Of Public Education Chhattisgarh, 1st Floor, CDivision, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
3. Joint Director, Directorate Of Public Education Chhattisgarh, 1st Floor, C-Division, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For State :
Mr. Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 11.02.2021
1. The challenge of the petitioner in the present writ petition is to the declaration of the petitioner ineligible for participating in the recruitment process for the post of Lecturer.
2. According to the petitioner, she has done her post graduation in Nano Technology which is part of studies of Applied Physics and therefore, the petitioner ought not to have been rejected but she should have
been considered for the said post.
3. Perusal of the record would clearly show that the requirement as per the advertisement for appointment to the post of Lecturer was Post Graduation in one of the subjects reflected against the post of Lecturer (Physics). For the said post, the qualification required was having Post Graduation in physics/electronics/applied physics/nuclear physics. The petitioner in the instant case does not have M. Tech in any of the aforesaid subjects, but has undertaken his studies in the subject 'Nano Technology' which is one of the subjects in the field of Applied Physics and that by itself cannot bring the educational qualification of the petitioner to be one which is required under the advertisement.
4. Given the aforesaid admitted factual matrix, this Court is of the opinion that no strong case has been made out by the petitioner calling for an interference with the impugned order of declaring the petitioner ineligible for participating in the recruitment process for the post of Lecturer.
5. The writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai