Employer free to reject over-qualified applicants: SC

Verdict overturned Odisha HC’s decision allowing a graduate to be appointed as a peon with the Punjab National Bank

A prospective employer has discretion not to appoint a candidate who may have a “higher qualification”, but not the one prescribed for the job vacancy, the Supreme Court has held.

A Bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan said courts have limited judicial review over such decisions by employers. Prescription of qualifications for a post is a matter of recruitment policy. Discretion lies with the employer.

“It is for the employer to determine and decide the relevancy and suitability of the qualifications for any post, and it is not for the courts to consider and assess,” Justice M.R. Shah, who authored the verdict, pointed out.

The apex court said courts allow a “greater latitude” for employers to prescribe the necessary qualification for a post.

“There is a rationale behind it… Qualifications are prescribed keeping in view the need and interest of an institution or an industry or an establishment as the case may be. The Courts are not fit instruments to assess expediency or advisability or utility of such prescription of qualifications,” the apex court judgment explained.

It, however, noted that an employer cannot act arbitrarily or fancifully in prescribing qualifications for posts.

The judgment came on an appeal filed by the Punjab National Bank against an Orissa High Court decision allowing an over-qualified candidate to be appointed as a peon.

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court decision of November 22, 2019 upholding an over-qualified candidate’s claim to a job as peon in the bank.

It noted that this candidate had deliberately not disclosed the fact that he was a graduate. It was known only later.

Besides, the prescribed qualification for the job was Class 12 pass. The Bank had a specific rule against appointing a graduate as peon.

“In the present case, prescribing the eligibility criteria/educational qualification that a graduate candidate shall not be eligible and the candidate must have passed 12th standard is justified. It was a conscious decision taken by the Bank in force since 2008. Therefore, the High Court has clearly erred,” the Supreme Court observed.

Disclaimer: This post has not been edited by our staff and is published from a syndicated feed. The Original Source of this post can be found at Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest

Ban orders in Bhadravati

Bhadravati taluk administration has clamped prohibitory orders in the town for the next three days in view of the...

Massive fire threatens to cause colossal damage to Similipal Biosphere

It is home to a wide range of wild animals including tigers and elephants, birds, amphibians and reptiles A massive fire has threatened to cause...

Sona Mohapatra lashes out at Roohi song Nadiyon Paar, says ‘sorry...

Singer Sona Mohapatra on Wednesday criticised the song “Nadiyon Paar”, the recreated version of singer Shamur’s popular 2008 track “Let The Music Play”, saying...

Fahadh Faasil injured on the sets of Malayankunju

Malayalam actor Fahadh Faasil suffered injuries while shooting for his upcoming film Malayankunju. According to reports, he was doing stunt sequences, which required him...

More Articles