IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.: 3504 of 2009 Date of decision: 25.10.2010 Kranti Katoch … Petitioner. Versus H.P.State Electricity Board and another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. . For the petitioner: Mr.Rajnish Maniktala, Advocate. For the respondent No.1: Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. For the respondent No.2: Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. By means of this petition the petitioner here-in has challenged the appointment of respondent No.2 as Junior Engineer (Computer Science Engineering) by the respondent-Board. The whole dispute revolves around the meaning of batch and batch wise basis appointment. 2. The undisputed facts are that respondent No.2, who was selected, obtained a diploma in Electrical Engineering in the year 1990. He thereafter studied further and qualified to obtain a decree in the Computer Science Engineering in the year 1993. On the other hand the petitioner obtained a diploma in the Computer Science Engineering in the year 1997. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 3. The respondent-Board invited applications for filling up six posts of Junior Engineer in Computer Science alongwith other posts. It is not disputed that as per the rules framed by the Board 77% posts have to be filled in by direct recruitment and 23% by promotion. Further it is undisputed that out of the 77% posts meant for direct recruitment 50% have to be filled in on batch wise basis. Admittedly, the respondent has been selected not on merit but in the category meant for batch wise basis. 4. To put it succinctly, the grievance of the petitioner is that while considering the batches for appointment on batch-wise basis only those diploma holders who had obtained diploma in Computer Science Engineering could be taken into consideration. It is submitted that since the respondent No.2 has obtained diploma in Electrical Engineering he cannot be considered for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer in Computer Science on batch wise basis. Shri Rajnish Maniktala, learned counsel for the petitioner, has urged that batch means a group of people or things of the same kind. 5. There can be no quarrel with the proposition that batch means a group of things or people who are similarly situated. But what is the purpose of making batch wise selection? The purpose behind making batch wise selection is that people who have obtained minimum eligibility qualifications of a particular posts a long time back should not for ever be kept out of job because they fall lower in merit. Therefore, for filling of various kinds of posts the 3 State has evolved a criteria wherein some percentage of posts are filled in on batch wise basis i.e. the seniority from the date the minimum eligibility criteria is obtained and some percentage of posts are filled in only on merit basis. In case of merit also the candidate must fulfill the minimum eligibility criteria but then their merit is assessed on the basis of various other criteria framed by the recruiting authority and selection made. In case of batch wise selection no merit is assessed and the selection will be made only on the basis of batch in which the candidate attains the minimum eligibility criteria. 6. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the selected candidate i.e. respondent No.2 had never obtained a diploma in Computer Science Engineering and therefore, he cannot be considered from any batch as far as the minimum eligibility criteria is concerned. In case the respondent No.2 had not obtained any higher qualification there would have been merit in the case of the petitioner. However, in the present case, the respondent No.2 after obtaining his diploma in the year 1990 obtained a decree in Computer Science Engineering in the year 1993. This qualification is a qualification which is higher than that of diploma. Therefore, in the year 1993 at least the respondent No.2 became eligible for being considered for the post of Junior Engineer in Computer Science Engineering also. It may be true that prior to 1993 respondent No.2 could not have been appointed in the Computer Science Engineering wing but the fact remains that from 1993 4 onwards he was eligible for this post. Admittedly, the petitioner only qualified his diploma in Computer Science in the year 1997; 4 years after the selected candidate had already obtained the decree in Computer Science. Therefore, on the date when respondent No.2 become eligible for being appointed as Junior Engineer the petitioner was not even eligible and may not even joined his course of study. 7. Be that as it may, I am of the considered view that when a person with higher qualifications is available and such higher qualifications make him eligible for the post in hand, such a person must be deemed to belong to the batch in the year which he qualified the higher qualifications. Otherwise, it would lead to travesty of justice where a person who has higher qualifications is denied appointment and a person with a lower qualifications obtained after him is granted appointment. 8. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in the petition, which is accordingly rejected. No order as to costs. 25th October, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) ™ Judge.