Raipur
In a significant ruling, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice B.D. Guru of the Chhattisgarh High Court has stated that it is the prerogative of the employer to determine the qualifications and criteria necessary for appointment or promotion to any post.
The High Court observed that the employer has the liberty to prescribe essential, desirable, or preferential qualifications based on the needs of the organization, the nature of the work, and institutional interests. This ruling was delivered while dismissing a petition filed by 16 employees of the High Court itself.
The petition had challenged the new rules adopted for promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III. The petitioners primarily included Bhim Bali Yadav and 15 other Class IV employees who argued that they had been working on the same pay and position for 15–20 years without promotion. They contended that the criteria for promotion as defined in the 2003 and 2015 service rules should apply.
The petitioners sought the quashing of the notification issued by the High Court administration on February 24, 2022, which mandated a written and skill test under the rules framed in 2017. They argued that since they were appointed under earlier rules, their promotions should be governed by those same rules.
However, the High Court had conducted written and skill tests for promotion to 69 vacant posts of Assistant Grade-III on March 5, 2022. The petitioners opposed this process, claiming that the 2017 rule amendments were adverse to their interests and contradicted earlier established norms. They asserted that under the 2003 rules, they were eligible for promotion upon completing two years of service with a graduation or 12th pass qualification (with a Hindi/English typing test).
The advocate for the High Court administration informed the court that rules were updated over time based on evolving requirements. In 2015, a provision was added to fill 10% of the posts through a limited competitive examination based solely on merit — a provision that had never been challenged by the petitioners.
In 2017, the Chhattisgarh High Court Services (Recruitment, Conditions of Service, and Conduct) Rules were notified, which nullified all previous rules. Under the new rules, 75% of the posts are to be filled through direct recruitment by competitive examination, while 25% are reserved for promotion — for which both written and skill tests are mandatory.
The Division Bench emphasized in its ruling that the employer holds the authority to prescribe the qualifications required for appointments. The employer is best positioned to determine the qualifications based on the nature of work and institutional requirements.
The court clarified that judicial interference is warranted only when a notification is ambiguous or a rule violates the law. It further stated that if advertisements and notifications are clear, the court cannot rewrite them, nor can it treat desirable qualifications as equivalent to essential ones. The court added that the assessment of equivalence is also beyond the scope of judicial review.
