http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7  

PETITIONER: DR. B.L. ASAWA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT05/03/1982

BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) KOSHAL, A.D. MISRA, R.B. (J)

CITATION:  1982 AIR  933            1982 SCR  (3) 444  1982 SCC  (2)  55        1982 SCALE  (1)222

ACT:      Educational qualifications-Post-graduate  qualification in medicine  granted by  a University  established  under  a statute-Qualification recognised  by  the  Medical  Council- Recognition  or   declaration  of   equivalence   by   every University in the country-Whether necessary.

HEADNOTE:      The qualifications  prescribed for the post of lecturer in Forensic  Medicine under  the Rajasthan  Medical  Service were  (i)   a  basic   university   degree   or   equivalent qualification entered in the schedules to the Indian Medical Council Act  1956; (ii) Registration under the State Central Medical Registration  Act; (iii) Post-Graduate qualification in the  concerned subject  and (iv)  two years experience of medico-legal work.      The appellant  was the holder of a M.B.B.S. degree from the Rajasthan  University which  was a qualification entered the first schedule to the Indian Medical Council Act. He was registered under  the Medical Registration Act. He possessed a  post-graduate   degree  in  Forensic  Medicine  from  the University of Bihar.      The respondent’s  application for  the post of lecturer in Forensic  Medicine  was  rejected  by  the  State  Public Service Commission  on the  ground  that  the  post-graduate degree in  Forensic Medicine  possessed by  him was  not one awarded by  the University  of Rajasthan and that the degree which he  possessed had  also not  been  recognised  by  the University of Rajasthan.      A  single   Judge  of   the  High   Court  allowed  the appellant’s writ  petition impugning  the order of the State Public Service Commission.      On appeal  by the  State a  Division Bench  of the High Court  held   that  the  post-graduate  degree  in  Forensic Medicine which  the appellant possessed could not be treated as a  valid qualification  for recruitment  to the  post  of lecturer because,  firstly, it  was not  a degree  from  the University  of  Rajasthan  and  secondly,  neither  had  the University of Rajasthan recognised it nor had the University declared it  as a  qualification  equivalent  to  the  post- graduate degree in Forensic Medicine.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7  

    Allowing the appeal, 445 ^      HELD: 1.  A post-graduate  medical degree  granted by a university duly  established by  statute in this country and which had  been recognised  by the Indian Medical Council by inclusion in  the schedule  of the  Medical Council  Act has ipso facto  to be  regarded, accepted  and treated  as valid throughout the  country.  In  the  absence  of  any  express provision to the contrary, such a degree does not require to be specifically  recognised by  other universities  in India before it  can be  accepted as  a  valid  qualification  for appointment in any post in a State. [450 F-G]      In the  instant case  the University  of Bihar was duly established by  statute. It  is fully  competent to  conduct examination and  award  degrees  the  degree  of  Doctor  of Medicine (Forensic  Medicine) of  the University of Bihar is included in  the schedule to the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 as  a degree  recognised by the Medical Indian Council, the peramount  professional body  set  up  by  statute  with authority to recognise medical qualifications granted by any university or medical institution in India. [450 D-E]      2. There  can be  declaration of  equivalence  only  as between a  degree etc.  awarded by  the concerned university and a  qualification obtained from a body different from the concerned university.  When the University of Rajasthan does not conduct  any examination  for the award of the degree of Doctor of  Medicine (Forensic  Medicine) there cannot be any question of  declaration of ’equivalence’ in respect of such a degree awarded by any university. [451 B-C]      3. In  the  case  of  a  post-graduate  degree  in  the concerned subject  awarded by  a statutory Indian University no recognition  or declaration  of equivalence  by any other university is  called for.  This is  all the  more so in the case of  a medical  degree awarded  by  a  statutory  Indian University and which has been specifically recognised by the Indian Medical Council. [451 D-E]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal No. 303 of 1976.      Appeal by  special leave  from the  Judgment and  order dated the  30th October, 1974 of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 247 of 1974.      Y.S. Chitale, Mrs. Sadhana Ramachandran & Parveen Kumar for the Appellant.      Badri Das Sharma for the Respondents Nos. 1 & 2.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      BALAKRISHNA ERADI,  J. This  appeal  by  special  leave arises out  of a writ petition filed by the appellant herein in the  High Court of Rajasthan, challenging the legality of the action  of the  Rajasthan Public  Service Commission  in issuing of the appellant the Communication-Annexure IV-dated July 21, 1973, stating that the 446 appellant  was   not  eligible   for  being  considered  for recruitment to  the post of Lecturer in Forensic Medicine in the Government Medical Colleges in the state since he lacked the  necessary  academic  qualifications  specified  in  the advertisement and  that consequently, the application of the appellant stood  rejected. There  were also other incidental prayers  in  the  writ  petition  for  the  issuance  of  an appropriate  writ   or  direction   to  the  Public  Service

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7  

Commission to  refrain from finalising the selection without considering the  case of  the appellant, and for a direction being issued  to the  State Government  of Rajasthan  not to accept the  recommendations of the Public Service Commission in making  appointments to  the post of Lecturer in Forensic Medicine to  Medical  Colleges  in  Rajasthan  in  case  the appellant was  not called for interview along with the other candidates.      A learned  Single Judge  of the  High Court allowed the Writ petition holding that the Public Service Commission had acted illegally  in treating the appellant as not possessing the requisite  academic qualifications  and in rejecting his candidature for the post of Lecturer in Forensic Medicine on the said  ground. The  State of  Rajasthan and the Rajasthan Public Service  Commission  carried  the  matter  in  appeal before a  Division Bench  of the High Court. That appeal was allowed by  a Division  Bench by  its judgment dated October 30, 1974,  whereby the  order passed  by the  learned Single Judge was  set aside  and the  writ petition  filed  by  the appellant was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said decision, the appellant has  preferred this appeal after obtaining special leave from this Court.      The appellant  secured the  M.B.B.S.  Degree  from  the University  of   Rajasthan  in   the  year  1954  and  after undergoing houseman-ship  for one year, he was substantively appointed as  Civil Assistant Surgeon in the Rajasthan State Medical Service  with effect from May 26, 1956. In 1962, the Rajasthan Medical  Service was bifurcated into two branches, namely, (1)  The  Rajasthan  Medical  Service  and  (2)  The Rajasthan  Medical  Service  (Collegiate  Branch).  Separate service  rules   known  as  the  Rajasthan  Medical  Service (Collegiate Branch)  Rules,  1962  (hereinafter  called  the Rules)  were  framed  for  the  Collegiate  branch  and  all appointments of  teaching staff  in the  Government  Medical Colleges in  Rajasthan were  thereafter governed by the said Rules. Under  the provisions  of  the  Rules,  the  post  of Lecturer is  to be  filled up only by direct recruitment. It is laid down in Chapter IV of the Rules which prescribes the procedure for  direct recruitment  that the appointments are to be 447 made on  the basis  of selection by the State Public Service Commission. Rule 12 lays down that "the candidate for direct recruitment to the post specified in Parts A, B and C of the Schedule  shall   possess  such   academic   and   technical qualifications and  experience as is laid down, from time to time, by  the Rajasthan University for the teaching staff in Medical Colleges". The post of Lecturers is included in Part C of  the schedule to the Rules. Hence, for ascertaining the qualifications required  for the  post of Lecturer under the Rules one  has to  refer to  the Rules relating to technical qualifications and  experience laid  down by  the  Rajasthan University for the teaching staff in Medical Colleges.      Clause (vii)  of Ordinance  No. 65 occurring in Chapter XX of  the Handbook of the University of Rajasthan, Part II, Vol. I,  is the relevant provision wherein the University of Rajasthan  has   prescribed  the   academic  and   technical qualifications and  experience required  for eligibility for appointment as  teachers in Medical Colleges. That clause is in the following terms:           "1. All  teachers must  possess a basic University      or equivalent qualification entered in Schedules to the      Indian Medical  Council Act  1956, except  in the  non-      clinical    departments    of    Antomy,    Physiology,      Biochemistry,  Pharmacology,  Microbiology  where  non-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7  

    medical teachers,  to the  extent of  30% of  the total      posts of the department may be appointed to posts other      than that  of the  Director or  Head of the Department,      who  must   necessarily  hold   a  recognised   medical      qualification.           2. Medical  men must be registered under the State      Central  Medical   Registration  Act   and  non-medical      persons  must   be  recognised  as  teachers  with  the      University before appointments are made permanent.           3. All  the teachers  in Medical  Colleges  except      Registrars and Demonstrators must possess the requisite      post-graduate   qualification   in   their   respective      subjects.           4. 50%  of the  time spent  in recognised research      under the  Indian Council  of  Medical  Research  or  a      University or  a Medical  College, after  obtaining the      requisite  Post-graduate   qualification   be   counted      towards teaching experience for the post of Lecturer in      the same or in allied subject 448      provided that  50% of  the teaching experience shall be      the regular teaching experience.           5. Equivalent  qualification referred to above and      in the recommendations below shall be determined by the      University of Rajasthan.           6. In  case of  specialities  under  Medicine  and      Surgery the  qualifications and  experience should also      be as  scheduled below  but in  case the  post has been      advertised and  suitable candidates  are not  available      the qualifications can be reladed."      This  is   followed  by   a  tabular  statement  headed      ’Requirements of  Special Academic  Qualifications  and      Teaching Experience’. Column 1 of this table deals with      the  posts,   Column   2   lays   down   the   academic      qualifications  and   Column  3   is   about   Teaching      Experience. The  table has  a  number  of  sub-headings      according to  the various  specialities. The speciality      of Forensic  Medicine is  given  at  page  168  of  the      Handbook  (1971   Edition).  The   relevant   provision      regarding  "Lecturer   in  Forensic   Medicine"  is  as      follows:           "(d)  Assistant    M.D. (Path.),      Two years                 Professor/   M.D. (Forensic     of Medico-                 Lecturer     Medicine),         Legal work.                              Speciality Board of                              Pathology (USA),                              M.D./M.R.C.P./                              F.R.C.P. (with                              Diploma D.F.M.),                              M.R.C.P. (with                              Forensic Medicine as                              Special Subject)                              or equivalent                              qualification or                              Post-graduate                              degree or equivalent                              qualification in                              Medicine or Surgery."      On  March   3,  1972,   the  Rajasthan  Public  Service Commission (for short, the Commission) issued advertisements inviting appli- 449 cations for  the recruitment  of two  Lecturers in  Forensic Medicine for  Medical  Colleges,  Medical  &  Public  Health Department in accordance with the Rules.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7  

    The appellant had, by then, obtained the M.D. Degree in Forensic Medicine  from the University of Bihar, Muzaffarpur in 1970  and had  been functioning  as Lecturer  in Forensic Medicine in  one  of  the  Government  Medical  Colleges  in Rajasthan on  a temporary and ad hoc basis from December 31, 1970 on wards.      In response to the aforesaid advertisement published by the Commission, the appellant applied for appointment to one of the  two posts. However, by the impugned letter (Annexure IV) dated  July 21,  1973, issued  by the  Secretary of  the Commission, the  appellant was informed that his application for the  post of  Lecturer in Forensic Medicine was rejected since  he   did   not   possess   the   necessary   academic qualification. A representation made by the appellant to the Public Service  Commission for reconsideration of the matter did not  meet with  any favourable  response and  hence  the appellant approached  the High  Court  by  filing  the  writ petition under  Article 226 of the Constitution out of which this appeal  has arisen.  During the  pendency of  the  writ petition, the  Commission conducted  the  interview  of  the remaining candidates  and selected  respondents Nos. 3 and 4 for appointment  to the  two posts  and on  the basis of the said selection  the State Government appointed respondents 3 and 4 as lecturers. The appellant thereupon amended the writ petition by  incorporating a  further prayer  that the  High Court  should   issue  an   appropriate  writ  or  direction cancelling the  interview and  selection  conducted  by  the Commission as  well as  the consequential appointments given by the  State Government to respondents 3 and 4 as Lecturers in Forensic Medicine.      The  short  point  to  be  considered  is  whether  the Commission was  right in law in excluding the appellant from consideration on  the ground  that he  did not  possess  the academic  qualification   prescribed  by   clause  (vii)  of Ordinance No.  65 of the Rajasthan University Ordinances for the post of Lecturer in Forensic Medicine.      The qualifications  prescribed for  the  said  post  by clause (vii) of Ordinance No. 65 are:      (1)  A  basic   University  (Degree  ?)  or  equivalent           qualification entered  in Schedules  to the Indian           Medical Council Act, 1956. 450      (2)  Registration  under   the  State/Central   Medical           Registration Act.      (3)  Post-graduate  qualification   in  the   concerned           subject.      (4)  Two Years’ experience of Medico-legal work.      The appellant  is admittedly  the holder  of the  basic Degree of M.B.B.S. from the Rajasthan University, which is a qualification entered  in the  First Schedule  to the Indian Medical Council  Act. It  is also  not in dispute that he is duly registered under the Medical Registration Act. The sole ground on  which the appellant was treated by the Commission as ineligible  for consideration  was that the Post-graduate degree in  Forensic Medicine  possessed by  the appellant is not one  awarded by the University of Rajasthan and the said Degree has  also not  been recognised  by the  University of Rajasthan as an equivalent qualification.      The University  of Bihar  at Muzaffarpur  is  one  duly established by  statute and it is fully competent to conduct examinations and  award degrees.  The Degree  of  Doctor  of Medicine (Forensic Medicine)-M.D. (Forensic Medicine)-of the University of  Bihar is  included in  the  Schedule  to  the Indian  Medical   Council  Act,   1956  as  a  degree  fully recognised by  the  Indian  Medical  Council  which  is  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7  

paramount professional body set up by statute with authority to recognise  the  medical  qualifications  granted  by  any University or  Medical Institution in India. A Post-graduate Medical Degree  granted by  a University duly established by statute in  this country  and which has also been recognised by the  Indian Medical  Council by inclusion to the Schedule of the  Medical Council  Act has  ipso facto to be regarded, accepted and treated as valid throughout our country. In the absence of  any express  provision to  the contrary,  such a degree does  not require  to be  specifically recognised  by other Universities  in any  State in  India before it can be accepted  as  a  valid  qualification  for  the  purpose  of appointment to  any post in such a State. The Division Bench of the  High Court  was, in our opinion, manifestly in error in thinking that since the Post-graduate degree possessed by the appellant  was not  one obtained  from the University of Rajasthan, it  could not be treated as a valid qualification for the purpose of recruitment in question in the absence of any  specific   order  by   the  University   of   Rajasthan recognising the said degree or declaring it as an equivalent qualification. It  is  common  ground  before  us  that  the University of Rajasthan does not 451 conduct  Post-graduate   examinations  in   the  subject  of Forensic Medicine  and it  does not award the degree of M.L. (Forensic Medicine). In order that there should be scope for declaration of  ’equivalence’ of  a  qualification  obtained from  another   body,  there   should  be   a  corresponding qualification that  can be  earned by  virtue of  passing an examination or  test conducted  by the concerned University. There can  be declaration  of equivalence  only as between a degree etc.  awarded by  the concerned  University  and  one obtained  from   a  body   different  from   the   concerned University.  When  the  University  of  Rajasthan  does  not conduct any  examination for the award of the degree of M.L. (Forensic  Medicine),   there  cannot  be  any  question  of declaration of  ’equivalence’ in  respect of  such a  degree awarded by  any University.  Unfortunately, the State Public Service Commission as well as the Division Bench of the High Court failed  to notice  this crucial  aspect. We  may  also point out  that the declaration of ’equivalence’ referred to in Section 23A of the Rajasthan University Act as well as in clause (vii) of Ordinance No. 65 of the Rajasthan University Ordinances can  only be  in respect  of qualifications other than  basic   or  Post-graduate  degrees  awarded  by  other statutory Indian  Universities in the concerned subjects. In the case  of a Post-graduate degree in the concerned subject awarded by  a statutory Indian University, no recognition or declaration of equivalence by any other University is called for. This  is all  the more  so in  the case  of  a  medical degree-basic as  well as  Post-graduate-that is awarded by a statutory Indian  University and which has been specifically recognised by the Indian Medical Council.      Though a contention was taken by the respondents in the High Court  as well  as before us that the appellant did not also satisfy the requirement regarding "two years of Medico- legal work",  we don’t  find any force in the said plea. The certificates from  the Principal and Heads of Departments of Forensic Medicine in the concerned Medical Colleges produced by the  appellant in  the High  Court as  annexures  in  his affidavit dated  July 27,  1973 which are at pages 31 and 33 of the  printed Paper  Book, establish beyond doubt that the appellant had  put in  more than  two years  of Medico-legal work in  Dr. S.  N. Medical  College and  in the  Dharbhanga Medical College,  prior  to  the  last  date  fixed  by  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7  

Commission for receipt of the applications.      The  conclusion   that  emerges   from  the   aforesaid discussion is  that the  appellant was  fully qualified  for being considered for 452 appointment to  the  two  posts  of  Lecturers  in  Forensic Medicine advertised  by the Commission on November 16, 1972, and that  the Commission  acted illegally  in  treating  the appellant as  not being  possessed of the requisite academic qualification and  excluding him  from consideration  on the said ground.      Accordingly,  we  allow  this  appeal,  set  aside  the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court and restore the judgment  of the  learned Single  Judge, subject  to the modification that  in carrying  out the directions contained in the  judgment of the learned Single Judge, the Commission should treat the appellant as a fully qualified candidate in the light of the finding recorded by us that at the relevant time the  appellant  possessed  not  merely  the  prescribed academic qualification  but also the requisite experience of two years’  Medico-legal work.  The appellant  will get  his costs throughout from respondents 1 and 2 in equal shares. P.B.R.                                       Appeal allowed. 453