ANANTHURAJ KB vs RAIL BHAWAN

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
O.A.No.180/00529/2025
st
Tuesday, this the 1 day of September, 2026
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. HARIPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. BRAJ MOHAN AGRAWAL, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Ananthuraj K.B., Aged 25 years, S/o Baburaj K.K.,
Kalarikkal Karumuthil (H) Pengamuck. P.O, Kunnamkulam,
Thrissur District, Kerala- 680 544.
-Applicant
[By Advocates: Mr.V.K.Sathyanathan, Mr.Vinod K.C., Ms.Rati Varma
Ms.Renju K.R.]
V e r s u s
1. Union of India, Represented by the Secretary,
Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi-110 001
2. The General Manager, Southern Railways,
Southern Railway Head Quarters, Park Town, Chennai- 600003.
3. The Chairman, Railway Recruitment Board, Thiruvananthapuram
Thampanoor, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala- 695 001
4. Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Thiruvananthapuram Division,
Division Office, Thiruvananthapuram Central Railway Station,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala-695 001.
-Respondents
[By Advocate: Mrs.Girija K. Gopal]
The application having been heard on 20.08.2026, the Tribunal on
01.09.2026 delivered the following order:
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

2
O R D E R
Justice K.Haripal, Judicial Member
The short question that posed for consideration is whether the
applicant who possesses a degree in Bachelor of Technology in Production
Engineering is eligible to be considered for appointment as Assistant Loco
Pilot.
2. The Railway Recruitment Board invited applications vide
Annexure-A3 Centralised Employment Notice, CEN, for recruiting Assistant
Loco Pilots across the country. Total vacancies all over Railway Recruitment
Boards is 5696. The applicant is a native of Thrissur. In Southern Railway 70
vacancies were notified including 39 UR vacancies. out of 70, 7 was set apart
for Ex-Servicemen. Essential qualifications required for the post are as under:
“A) Matriculation/SSLC plus ITI from recognized institutions of
NCVT/SCVT IN the trades of Fitter, Electrician, Instrument
Mechanic, Millwright/Maintenance Mechanic, Mechanic (Radio
& TV), Electronics Mechanic, Mechanic (Motor Vehicle),
Wireman, Tractor Mechanic, Armature & Coil Winder, Mechanic
(Diesel), Heat Engine, Turner, Mechanist, Refrigeration & Air-
conditioning Mechanic.
OR
Matriculation / SSLC Plus Course Completed Act Apprentice ship
in the trades mentioned above.
OR
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

3
B) Matriculation/SSLC plus three years Diploma in Mechanical/
Electrical/Electronics/Automobile Engineering.
OR
Combination of various streams of these Engineering disciplines
from a recognized Institution in lieu of ITI.”
3. Applicant successfully completed the Computer test-I and
Computer Aptitude test and was called for document verification. He
rd
appeared for verification with all the original documents. But the 3
respondent verbally told him that his qualification is not acceptable as he
possesses degree in Production Engineering and not in Mechanical
Engineering, which is not approved. However, he was not given any formal
communication. Therefore, he sent e-mails, which were not responded and
then he has approached the Tribunal seeking to call for the records and grant
the following reliefs:
“(ii) Considering the Approval Process Hand Books of All India
Council for Technical Education and also the Certificate by the Dean
(Academic) of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, issue a
declaration that the applicant who possesses B Tech in Production
Engineering is eligible to be selected to the post of Assistant Loco Pilot
in the Indian Railways.
(iii) To issue directions to the respondents to issue memo for
medical examination to the applicant and to appoint him to the post
of Assistant Loco Pilot in the Indian Railways in a vacancy available as
per the Centralised Employment Notice No. 01/2024 for recruitment
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

4
of Assistant Loco Pilot, if he clears the medical examination.
(iv) To pass any further orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may
deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
4. According to the applicant, in order to avoid any confusion in the
matter, he had obtained Annexure-A9 testimony in advance from Dr.Vinu
Thomas, Dean (Academic) of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University
certifying that Production Engineering is listed under Mechanical Engineering.
Referring to Annexures-A10 and A11 approval process hand books of 2023-
2024 and 2024-2027 respectively of All India Council for Technical Education,
he states that it is amply clear that Production Engineering is one among the
branch coming under the major discipline Mechanical Engineering.
5. According to the applicant, Production Engineering is a
specialised branch of Mechanical Engineering. Therefore, it cannot be said
that a graduate in Production Engineering is ineligible to apply and secure a
job where a Mechanical Engineering graduate can apply. Mechanical
Engineering is a broader field and Production Engineering is a specialised
area. It is clear from Annexure-A9 certificate that Production Engineering is
one among the branches coming under the major discipline Mechanical
Engineering and that Production Engineering is listed under Mechanical
Engineering. Hence the applicant is educationally fully qualified for applying
for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot in the Indian Railways. The stand of the
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

5
respondents in not processing his documents and deploying for training,
having regard to his qualification, is illegal, unlawful and unjust.
th
6. On behalf of the respondents, the 4 respondent filed reply
challenging the very maintainability of the O.A. According to him, the
applicant does not possess the essential educational qualifications required
for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot as notified by the Railway Recruitment
Board. In a catena of decisions, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that it is for
the employer to decide about the qualifications and eligibility of the
candidate to a particular post. Taking into consideration the duties to be
discharged the Tribunals or Courts shall not direct a change in the prescribed
qualifications.
7. The applicant, who possesses degree of Bachelor of Technology in
Production Engineering with minor in Chemical Engineering had filled up
online application form, whereas against sub-heading 'Bachelor of
Engineering (BE)' under the head 'essential qualification details' he had filled
up 'Mechanical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering'. He had also given a
declaration in Annexure-A4 stating as follows:
“"I hereby declare that I have gone through the eligibility criteria for
the post(s) applied for and that I meet the requisite eligibility
conditions. I understand that in case any information submitted by me
is incorrect or concealed, I shall be liable for immediate
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

6
disqualification or any other action as per extant rules. I also declare
that I have never been dismissed from any Government Service
(excluding the Defence Services under the Union of India).”
8. Thus he was permitted to appear for the CBT-I, CBT-II and
computer based aptitude test on the basis of the particulars furnished in the
online application. It was only during scrutiny at the time of document
verification on 23.10.2025, it had come to notice that the degree possessed
by him is not in Mechanical Engineering, but in Production Engineering,
rendering his candidature ineligible. He was informed that his qualification
was not acceptable and that his candidature would not be processed further.
9. Further, in the notification it is clearly stated that eligibility of the
candidate will be provisional based on details furnished in the application and
that the candidature will be accepted only provisionally subject to fullfilling
the basic eligibility criteria required. Further, it was specified that
certificates/documents in support of the educational qualification,
age/caste/category etc. shall be sought at the time of document verification
by the Railway Recruitment Board. On document verification, since he was
found ineligible, his name was not included in the result published in the
website on 09.12.2025. The respondents are also bound to adhere to the
prescribed qualifications in the notification as stated in Annexure-R1.
10. Thus, according to the respondents, candidates possessing
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

7
qualification other than the prescribed one in related or allied subjects cannot
be allowed to participate in the selection procedure. The applicant was
permitted to participate in the selection process provisionally on the basis of
the undertaking given by him in the application. Since he had mentioned
educational qualification as degree in Mechanical Engineering, only he was
permitted to participate in the selection process.
11. Further, it is submitted that he cannot claim any relief based on
Annexures-A9 to A11. Annexure-A9 issued by the Dean mentions that as per
AICTE process handbook, Production Engineering is listed under Mechanical
Engineering where no equivalency is mentioned. CEN mentions the
qualifications 3 years Diploma in Mechanical, Electrical, Electronics,
Automobile Engineering or combination of various streams in the Engineering
disciplines. It is seen that Automobile Engineering has been clearly and
separately mentioned in the qualification whereas AICTE handbook mentions
Automobile Engineering under Mechanical Engineering heading. If all such
courses mentioned under the heading of Mechanical Engineering were to be
considered suitably for ALP, there was no need of mentioning Automobile
Engineering separately in CEN. The Dean (Academic) of the APJ Abdul Kalam
Technological University has no authority to issue an equivalency certificate
for recruitment in Railway Recruitment Board examinations. Eligibility criteria
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

8
for posts are framed by each employer based on profile and nature of job and
it cannot be left open for decision by any academic authority. Only the
Railway administration is well versed with the job nature of each post and
what qualification is to be possessed by candidates applying for the posts. As
such, it cannot be left to the discretion of either the candidates or any other
authority to conclude that instead of Mechanical Engineering, Production
Engineering is an eligible qualification for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot.
Moreover, the handbook produced by the applicant itself states that 'the
approval process booklet acts like a road map for all institutions seeking
approval from the council to run programmes/ courses falling under our
ambit'. It does not mention about the equivalence of courses by AICTE for
recruitment purpose.
12. Further, it is submitted that education equivalence of Assistant
Loco Pilot is directly linked to operational safety and not merely to eligibility,
as candidates must possess a clear understanding of mechanical and electrical
systems in locomotives. When the notification stipulates Mechanical or
Electrical Engineering, the Railways cannot consider degree in an unrelated
field as the requisite or equivalent qualification since these courses may not
encompass all technical aspects necessary for the safe operation of trains. The
contention that Production Engineering is a specialized branch of Mechanical
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

9
Engineering and therefore automatically qualifies wherever Mechanical
Engineering is prescribed, is totally unacceptable. Recruitment qualifications
are to be construed strictly as per the notification, and in the absence of any
explicit inclusion of Production Engineering, the respondents cannot
unilaterally expand the scope of 'Mechanical Engineering' to cover additional
branches. Thus the O.A. is sought to be dismissed.
13. Applicant filed a rejoinder and submitted that he came to know
about the rejection of his candidature only when the reply was seen. Such a
decision of rejection has not been made on the basis of any expert opinion.
The decision appears to have been taken solely on the individual view of the
administrative officers of the RRB. Determination of equivalence or non-
equivalence of academic qualifications is a matter requiring expert academic
evaluation and cannot be decided by administrative authorities acting without
any technical expertise. According to him, Production Engineering is a
specialized stream within Mechanical Engineering discipline as evident from
Annexures-A9, A10 and A11 certificates issued by the Dean. He has also
produced B.Tech carriculam for Mechanical Engineering and Production
Engineering as Annexures-A15 and A16 respectively. They also produced the
prospectus for admission to PG Degree Course in Engineering for the year
2021-2022. Referring to the decision in Harshvardhan Malik v. State of
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

10
Haryana and others decided on 17.10.2025, it is submitted that the High
Court of Punjab and Haryana has observed that judiciary cannot remain a
passive observer when administrative decisions result in manifest injustice.
Relevant paragraph of this decision also has been quoted by the applicant.
According to the applicant, respondents' exclusion of Production Engineering,
despite acceptance of ITI trades and Diploma and Apprenticeship is arbitrary
and results in unequal treatment of candidates who possess demonstrably
higher and broader technical competence, in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution of India.
14. Similarly, it is submitted that the post of Assistant Loco Pilot is not
confined to technical skills alone. The role involves safety awareness,
alertness, coordination with the Loco Pilot and control staff, adherence to
operating rules, and the ability to respond to abnormal and emergency
situations. In such a multi-skill role, a candidate possessing B.Tech Degree in
Production Engineering, with broad-based training in mechanical systems,
manufacturing processes, electrical and electronics fundamentals, quality
systems, automation, safety and systems engineering, cannot be treated as
inferior to candidates possessing ITI trade certificates or diplomas or
Apprenticeship.
15. Further, it is submitted that in the judgment of the Hon'ble
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

11
Supreme Court in Zahoor Ahmad Rather and others. v. Sheikh Imtiyaz Ahmad
and others [2019) 2 SCC 404], relied on by the respondents, the facts are
unrelated whereas in this case, applicant is neither seeking substitution of
qualifications nor claiming eligibility on the basis of an allied or related
qualification. The applicant's case is confined to recognition of equivalence
within the same major engineering discipline, which says that Production
Engineering is an equivalent branch under Mechanical Engineering. The AICTE
is the statutory authority to regulate and classify technical education in the
country. The purpose of its classification is to provide certainty and uniform
recognition of technical qualification across institutions. Further, it is
submitted that the respondents have taken a narrow approach in considering
the nomenclature of the word 'Mechanical' alone without examining the
substance of the qualification. So, the applicant seeks a fair and reasonable
interpretation of the eligibility clause contained in the recruitment notification
and thus reiterated the averments in the O.A.
16. To this, the respondents filed a detailed additional reply
th
reiterating the contentions in the earlier reply. According to the 4
respondent, after the scrutiny of records, since he did not meet the
educational qualifications, he was aware that his application would not be
pursued by the respondents. He also gathered that, the respondents are not
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

12
entertaining his application and the O.A. was filed on 08.11.2025 whereas the
grievance submitted by him on 31.10.2025 in Central Public Service Redressal
and Monitoring System, CPGRAMS portal, where he clearly mentioned that
his candidature for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot was rejected. That means,
he had clear knowledge about the stand taken by the respondents. Moreover,
there is no provision either in the Recruitment Rules or in the guidelines for
referring non-inclusion of engineering batches to academic experts for
determination of equivalence at the stage of document verification.
17. The contention that he had cleared two stages of CBT-2/CBAT and
therefore he should be treated as eligible is unreasonable.
18. Similarly, reliance placed on AICTE Approval Process Handbook
and the certificate issued by the Dean of the University is misquoted.
Approval Process Handbook 2024-25 to 2026-27 of AICTE do not override
Recruitment Rules. The AICTE approval process handbook classifies academic
streams for regulatory and academic purposes. Such classification does not
bind in the matters of recruitment unless specifically adopted in the
recruitment notification.
19. Further it is submitted that the equivalence of degrees for
employment purposes must be determined by the recruiting authority, not by
the candidate, nor solely by the university issuing the degree. No statutory
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

13
notification, corrigendum, or clarification has been issued by the Railways
recognizing Production Engineering as equivalent to Mechanical Engineering.
The Railways being the employer, has the absolute right to decide which
branch provides the specific technical exposure required for the post of
Assistant Loco Pilot
20. Similarly, it is submitted that curriculum comparisons (Annexures
A-15 & A-16) of Rejoinder is not determinative. Overlapping subjects do not
establish equivalence of degrees. Many engineering streams share
foundational subjects such as Mathematics, Mechanics, and
Thermodynamics. That alone does not merge distinct disciplines into one.
21. Further, it is submitted that the recruitment eligibility is
determined by the nomenclature of the degree as specified in the notification
not by the selective subject comparison. CEN specifically prescribes the
educational qualification as 'Mechanical/Electrical/Electronics/Automobile
Engineering or combination of these streams and has expressly mentioned
'Automobile Engineering' as a distinct discipline. This clearly indicates that the
list of eligible qualifications is specific, exhaustive, and intended to be applied
strictly, leaving no scope for liberal interpretation.
22. It is submitted that the prescribed educational qualification is not
merely a formal eligibility condition but is intrinsically linked to the technical
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

14
competencies required for safe train operations. In such circumstances, the
Railways are fully justified in insisting upon strict compliance with the exact
disciplines specified in the notification. The requirement cannot be diluted by
treating 'similar' or allied branches as equivalent in the absence of an express
provision in the notification.
23. It is also submitted that Annexure-A17 of the rejoinder is merely
a handbook issued for admission to a Postgraduate Degree course in
Engineering and pertains exclusively to academic admission criteria. The
norms and eligibility conditions prescribed therein are intended solely for
regulating admissions within the academic framework of the concerned
institution and have no application to recruitment processes conducted by the
Railway Recruitment Board.
24. It is further submitted that the language of the notification is
clear and unambiguous in prescribing 'Degree/B.Tech in Mechanical/
Electrical/Electronics/Automobile Engineering' as the eligible qualification.
There is no scope for expansion of the listed disciplines. 'Production
Engineering' has not been notified as equivalent to Mechanical Engineering,
nor is there any provision for seeking expert opinion at the individual
Document Verification stage.
25. The respondents also stated that the Annexure-A18 decision has
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

15
no application to the facts of the case. Ultimately, the respondents have again
prayed for dismissing the O.A.
26. When argued, Sri.Sathyanathan, learned counsel for the applicant
has submitted that the applicant only sought for a fair and reasonable
interpretation of the eligibility clause contained in the recruitment
notification. A Graduate in Production Engineering is entitled to seek
admission for M.Tech Mechanical Engineering and vice versa. B.Tech in
Production Engineering is as good as Mechanical Engineering. The narrow
interpretation of the respondents, while an ITI holder is able to run a train
safely, it is unreasonable to say that the B.Tech holder in Production
Engineering is ineligible. Such a decision is an administrative decision only,
without an expert opinion. AICTE has treated Production Engineering as good
as Mechanical Engineering. In the absence of an expert view, the respondents
ought not to have rejected the contentions of the applicant mechanically.
According to the learned counsel, the decision is highly erroneous, which
requires to be corrected by the Tribunal. He also relied on the decision in
Laxmikant Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1174]
marked as Annexure-A18 and submitted that rejection of candidature based
on mere nomenclature is illogical and illegal.
27. It was reiterated that Production Engineering falls within the
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

16
Mechanical Engineering discipline for all eligibility purposes and exclusion of
the applicant from the sphere of consideration especially we he had cleared
all the tests, at the document verification stage is illegal and arbitrary, which
requires to be undone by the Tribunal.
28. On the other hand, Smt.Girija K Gopal, learned Standing Counsel
for the respondents placed reliance on a volley of decisions of the Hon'ble
Apex Court, High Court of Punjab and Haryana, High Court of Madras, Ranchi
Bench of this Tribunal etc. and argued that the respondents are not entitled to
get any relief. According to learned Standing Counsel, competency or
eligibility of the candidates have to be decided by the employer. Mechanical
Engineering and Production Engineering are independent disciplines. When
the Recruitment Board sets the qualifications the respondents have no right
to say that it should be diluted or relaxed. Production Engineering is not part
of Mechanical Engineering and the Recruitment Rules is very clear. There is no
equivalency between Mechanical Engineering and Production Engineering.
Relying on the authorities it is submitted that the equivalency cannot be
decided by the University or the Dean. Since the applicant does not satisfy
the minimum technical qualification as provided in Annexure-A3 notification,
he cannot be considered for appointment.
29. There is no dispute on the broad facts of the case. The applicant
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

17
is a graduate in Production Engineering. He applied for the post of Assistant
Loco Pilot pursuant to Annexure-A3 CEN No.1 of 2024. He submitted the
application; it was provisionally accepted and he underwent two computer
based tests. On clearing the tests, he was called for document verification, at
that stage, it was noticed that he did not possess the qualification in the
appropriate discipline. Thus his name was not considered for further process.
Aggrieved by the same, he has approached the Tribunal with the instant O.A.
30. There cannot be any dispute that the fact that he had cleared the
examinations is not a ground for including his name in the select list so long as
he does not possess the necessary technical qualification for the post as
prescribed in the CEN. In clause 4 of the CEN it is stated thus:
“(iv) Eligibility of the candidates will be provisional based on details
furnished by the candidates in the application. The RRB will not
undertake detailed scrutiny of applications for the eligibility, therefore,
candidature will be accepted only provisionally subject to fulfilling
basic eligibility criteria as required. Candidates must go through the
requirements of educational qualification, age, medical standards etc.
and satisfy themselves that they are eligible for the post. The
certificates/documents in support of their Educational Qualifications
and Age/Caste/Category, etc. shall be sought at the time of Document
Verification by RRB. After scrutiny of the certificates/documents of
EQs/age/caste/category, etc., if any claim made in the application is
not substantiated by certificates/documents, the candidature of
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

18
candidate will be cancelled. Further, during any stage of the
recruitment or even thereafter, if it is found that any information
about the candidate is false/incorrect or if the candidate has
suppressed any relevant information or the candidate does not satisfy
the eligibility criteria for the post, his/her candidature will be rejected
forthwith.”
On that basis, after submission of the application, he was provisionally
permitted to attend the computer base tests and only during the document
verification it came out that he did not possess necessary technical
qualifications, but he was a Graduate in Production Engineering, which does
not conform to the employment notice and the Recruitment Rules. Thus he
was not permitted to undergo further selection process.
31. The respondents have contended that, he submitted the
application claiming himself as a Graduate in Mechanical Engineering.
Obviously, that information was incorrect and he is a Graduate in Production
Engineering. That means, his candidature must have been rejected at the
threshold itself for giving incorrect information in the application form. This
aspect has not been touched in the rejoinder filed by the applicant.
32. The required qualifications have already been extracted above.
In the note, it is stated that degree in the Engineering disciplines as above will
also be acceptable in lieu of Diploma in Engineering. In other words, leaving
other options, if only the applicant had possessed a Degree or Diploma in
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

19
Mechanical/Electrical/Electronics or Automobile Engineering alone, he would
have been qualified to be considered for the post. The applicant wanted to
convince this Tribunal that he is eligible since he possess a degree in
Production Engineering, that a Graduate in Production Engineering can also fit
in the post wherever Degree in Mechanical Engineering is prescribed.
According to him, Mechanical Engineering is a broader field and Production
Engineering is a specified area. This has not been accepted by the
respondents and his candidature was not considered. In order to buttress the
contention, the applicant has also produced Annexure-A9 testimony issued by
Dr.Vinu Thomas, Dean (Academic) of APJ Abdul Kalam Technological
University. It is stated that the document verification was conducted on
23.10.2025. At that time, the applicant had carried Annexure-A9 certificate,
which reads thus:
“To whomsoever it may concern
This is to certify that Mr. Ananthuraj K B (TCR19PE013) is a
graduate in Bachelor of Technology who graduated in the year 2023
from APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala, India. He did his undergraduate study in Production
Engineering from Government Engineering College, Thrissur, Kerala,
India, which is an affiliated college under the APJ Abdul Kalam
Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.
As per the 2023-2024 Approval Process Hand Book, Annexure -
6, Major Disciplines, their corresponding Courses and
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

20
Relevant/Appropriate Branch of Under Graduate Degree in
Engineering and Technology, the Production Engineering is listed
under Mechanical Engineering.
As per the 2024 2027 Approval Process Hand Book, Annexure
13, Section B. Major Disciplines, their corresponding Courses and
Relevant/ Appropriate Branch of Under Graduate Degree in
Engineering and Technology, the Production Engineering is listed
under Mechanical Engineering.
The 2023-2024 and 2024-2027, the Approval Process Hand
Books are also attached.
This certificate is issued on his request.“
33. It is not known as to what had prompted the applicant to carry
such a certificate in advance. It clearly indicates that he himself was sceptical
about his eligibility, whether a person possessing Production Engineering will
be able to apply for the post which required qualification in the fields of
Mechanical Engineering, either Degree or Diploma.
34. Firstly, Production Engineering is not an Engineering discipline
accepted by the Railways as per the Employment Notice. Secondly and more
importantly, the respondents can act only in accordance with the employment
notice, which is truly in conformity with the Recruitment Rules. As rightly
submitted, approval Process Handbooks 2024-2025 to 2026-2027 of AICTE do
not override the Recruitment Rules. The AICTE framework, as correctly
pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel, classifies academic streams for
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

21
regulatory and academic purposes. Such classification does not bind the
employer in the matter of recruitment unless specifically adopted by the
notification. Moreover, equivalence of Degree for employment purpose must
be determined by the recruiting authority and not by the University which
issued the Degree. Recruitment eligibility must be decided strictly in
accordance with the educational qualifications prescribed in the notification.
In this connection, the oft-quoted judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Zahoor Ahmad Rather, quoted supra, is very important. Relevant portion of
the judgment reads thus:
“22......The prescription of qualifications for a post is a matter of
recruitment policy. The State as the employer is entitled to prescribe
the qualifications as a condition of eligibility. It is no part of the role
or function of judicial review to expand upon the ambit of the
prescribed qualifications. Similarly, equivalence of a qualification is
not a matter which can be determined in exercise of the power of
judicial review. Whether a particular qualification should or should
not be regarded as equivalent is a matter for the State, as the
recruiting authority, to determine.......... “
35. Thus the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that State as employer can
prescribe qualifications as a condition of eligibility, after taking into
consideration the nature of the job, aptitude required for efficient discharge
of duties, functionality of various qualifications, course content leading upto
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

22
the acquisition of various qualifications etc. Judicial review can neither
expand the ambit of the prescribed qualifications nor decide the equivalence
of the prescribed qualifications with any other given qualification.
Equivalence of qualification is a matter for the State as the recruiting agency
to determine. Following Zahoor Ahmad Rather, the Hon'ble Apex Court in
Shifana P.S. v. State of Kerala and others [(2024) 8 SCC 309] held that
equivalence of a qualification is not a matter that can be determined in the
exercise of power of judicial review. Whether a particular qualification should
or should not be regarded as equivalent is a matter for the State as the
recruiting authority to determine.
36. In Mukul Kumar Tyagi and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and
others [(2020) 4 SCC 86], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled thus:
“55. The equivalence of qualification as claimed by a candidate is
matter of scrutiny by the recruiting agency/employer. It is the
recruiting agency which has to be satisfied as to whether the claim of
equivalence of qualification by a candidate is sustainable or not. The
purpose and object of qualification is fixed by employer to suit or
fulfil the objective of recruiting the best candidates for the job. It is
the recruiting agency who is under obligation to scrutinise the
qualifications of a candidate as to whether a candidate is eligible and
entitled to participate in the selection. More so when the
advertisement clearly contemplates that certificate concerning the
qualification shall be scrutinised, it was the duty and obligation of
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

23
the recruiting agency to scrutinise the qualification to find out the
eligibility of the candidates............”
37. The applicant has complained that decision of rejection has not
been made on the basis of any expert opinion, the impugned decision was
based solely on the individual view of the administrative officers of the RRB,
Thiruvananthapuram at the stage of document verification without any expert
opinion. So, according to him, determination of equivalence or non-
equivalence of academic qualification is a matter requiring expert academic
evaluation and cannot be decided by the administrative authorities. In this
connection, we have come across the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Basic Education Board, U.P v. Upendra Rai and others [(2008) 3 SCC 432],
where it is held that:
“15. Grant of equivalence and /or revocation of equivalence is an
administrative decision which is in the sole discretion of the
concerned authority, and the Court has nothing to do with such
matters. The matter of equivalence is decided by experts appointed
by the government, and the Court does not have expertise in such
matters. Hence it should exercise judicial restraint and not interfere
in it.”
38. Now, turning to Annexure-A18 decision relied on by the learned
counsel for the applicant, it must be stated that it has turned upon its own
facts. The said decision does not pertain to recruitment under a statutory
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

24
notification prescribing specific educational qualifications. Here, the
respondents have to take care of the operational safety of the trains driven by
a Loco Pilot and eligibility should be decided strictly in accordance with the
educational qualifications prescribed by it. Moreover, it is not for the
academic head to say that the Degree in Production Engineering is equivalent
to Degree in Mechanical Engineering. In Guru Nanak Dev University v. Sanjay
Kumar Katwal and another [(2009)1 SCC 610], the Apex Court has held that
'any decision of the academic body of the University relating to equivalence
should be by a specific order or resolution, duly published. The applicant has
no case that any University, leave alone APJ Abdul Kalam Technological
University, as recognised B.Tech Production Engineering equivalent to B.Tech
Mechanical Engineering. It must also be assumed that an organisation like the
Railways must have fixed qualifications taking into account the efficacy of
service and requirements of the post.
39. Moreover, persons holding B.Tech/Diploma or any other technical
qualification in all disciplines will not fit in the post. Those technical aspects
cannot be decided based on Annexures-A10, A11, A15 or A16. The employer
has stated in unequivocal terms that a person possessing Degree in
Production Engineering is not suitable to the post of Assistant Loco Pilot.
Challenge against such a view is not judiciable. Therefore, the matter does
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

25
not call for interference by way of judicial review.
Resultantly, we dismiss the Original Application, with regrets. No costs.
st
( Dated, this the 1 day of September, 2026)
BRAJ MOHAN AGRAWAL JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
ds
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

26
List of Annexures
Annexure-A-1: True copy of the degree certificate pertaining to the
applicant
Annexure-A-2: True copy of the consolidated Statement of Grades
pertaining to the applicant
Annexure-A-3: True copy of the Centralised Employment Notice No.
01/2024 for recruitment of Assistant Loco Pilot
Annexure-A-4: True copy of the application to the post of Assistant Loco
Pilot submitted by the applicant with Registration number
291240006881
Annexure-A-5: True copy of the E Call letter received from the RRB by the
applicant for the Computer Based Test -1 with Roll No.
291241290659263
Annexure-A-6: True copy of the E Call letter for the Computer Based Test
-2 with Roll No. 291241290152944
Annexure-A-7: True copy of the E Call letter for the Computer Based
Aptitude Test with Roll No. 291241290152944
Annexure- A-8: True copy of the E Call letter for the Document Verification
with Roll No. 291241290152944
Annexure-A-9: True copies of the Certificate dated 8-10-2025 issued by
the Dean (Academic) of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological
University, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala certifying that the
Production Engineering is listed under the Mechanical
Engineering
Annexure-A-10: True copy of the 'Annexure 6' of the Approval Process Hand
Books of 2023-2024 of All India Council for Technical
Education
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'

27
Annexure-A-11: True copy of the 'Annexure 13' of the Approval Process
Hand Books of 2024-2027 of All India Council for Technical
Education
Annexure-A-12: True copy of the email sent to the AGM Southern Railway
(copy to the Railway Ministry) by the applicant dated
31/10/2025
Annexure-A-13: True copy of the email sent to the Chairman of RRB
Thiruvananthapuram by the applicant dated 31/10/2025
Annexure A-14: True hard copy of the email sent by post to the chairman of
RRB Thiruvananthapuram by the applicant along with
postal receipt and delivery details dated 01/11/2025
Annexure A-15 True copy of B.Tech Curriculum 2024 for Mechanical
Engineering (ME) issued by APJ Abdul Kalam Technological
University (KTU)
Annexure A-16 True copy of B.Tech Curriculum 2024 for Production
Engineering (PE) issued by APJ Abdul Kalam Technological
University (KTU)
Annexure A-17 True copy of Prospectus for admission To P.G. Degree
Course in Engineering for the year 2021-2022 issued by
Govt of Kerala, Dept of Technical Education vide G.O.
(Ms)No. 382/2021/HEDN dated 18-09-2021
Annexure A-18 True copy of the Judgment of Honorable Supreme Court in
Laxmikant Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh decided on
04 December 2025
Annexure-R1 True copy of the Railway Board letter No.E(NG)-II/2005/RR-
1/8

*
Deepa S 2026.09.02 13:03:08+05'30'