1 hour ago
2
ARTICLE AD BOX
Supreme Court (Image credit: ANI)
NEW DELHI: Sometimes overqualification becomes a disqualification. At a clip erstwhile highly qualified people, including PhD holders, are competing for people IV govt jobs, the Supreme Court has said a idiosyncratic could beryllium disqualified for a occupation if helium holds a qualification beyond the maximum prescribed qualification.Noting that an employer's request to person the close radical astatine the close spot does not ever mean those higher qualified, a seat of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan said determination is thing incorrect successful govt's determination putting a headdress connected the qualification for a station and disqualifying those holding higher degrees."The rationale down prescribing an precocious bounds of qualification is some tenable and equitable, to supply employment opportunities to persons who, owing to circumstances of life, could not prosecute higher education," the seat said."The State, arsenic a exemplary employer, is justified successful reserving definite categories of posts for specified persons truthful that they are not compelled to vie with much highly qualified candidates against whom they would ordinarily basal small accidental of selection. Such a argumentation has consistently been upheld by the courts. Thus, erstwhile the station was specifically intended for candidates possessing little acquisition qualifications, permitting a idiosyncratic with higher qualifications to unafraid specified employment would needfully effect successful depriving a genuinely eligible and deserving campaigner of the opportunity," the seat added.
It passed the bid portion upholding termination of occupation of a slope worker connected the crushed that helium was postgraduate astatine the clip of joining portion the occupation specification stipulated the campaigner should person the qualification of passing 8th standard, but should not person passed 12th modular oregon acquired qualification."..though we whitethorn person sympathy for the respondent, the behaviour attributed to him and the settled presumption of instrumentality permission america with nary enactment but to interfere with the impugned judgment."
