Nagvanti Atoliya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
- Court
- Madhya Pradesh High Court
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ALPESH Y. KOGJE,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
WRIT PETITION No. 20091 of 2025
RAHUL KUMAR SURYAVANSHI AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 20410 of 2025
NAGVANTI ATOLIYA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance :
Shri Naman Nagrath- Senior Advocate with Shri Anshul Tiwari- Advocate for the
petitioners.
Shri B.D. Singh-Government Advocate for the respondents-State.
Shri Parag Tiweari-Advocate for respondent-M.P.P.S.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
(Reserved on : 07/10/2026 )
( Pronounced on : 30/10/2026 )
Per: Justice Vivek Jain.
The challenge in these petitions has been made to orders dated 06.05.2025
and 02.06.2025 issued by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (for
short referred to as “MPPSC”) whereby the candidature of the petitioners for the
post of Assistant Professor in Botany subject in pursuance to Assistant Professor
(Botany) Examination 2022 conducted by MPPSC has been declared to be
cancelled for not having attained the post-graduate qualification in relevant or
allied subject.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
2
2 . At the outset, it is to be clarified that so far as petitioners No. 1, 4, 7, 8, 10 &
11 in WP No. 20091 of 2025, so also petitioner No. 1 in WP No. 20410 of 2025 are
concerned, these petitioners have failed to qualify the said examination and
therefore the petition in respect of these petitioners has already been dismissed
vide order dated 11.02.2026. Therefore, this order shall be applicable only to the
remaining petitioners i.e., petitioners no. 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, & 12 in WP No. 20091 of
2025 and petitioner No. 2, namely Mayuri Gupta in WP No. 20410 of 2025.
3. We have further been informed that petitioner No.12 in WP No.20091 of
2025 and petitioner No.2/Mayuri Gupta in WP No.20410 of 2025 have though
qualified the examination, but their results have been kept in sealed cover due to
pendency of reservation dispute in respect of percentage of OBC reservation in
State of Madhya Pradesh.
4 . Be that as it may, but we proceed to decide the legal issue in respect of these
petitioners also, because subject to finalization of reservation dispute, their
candidatures may be liable to be considered at a future date and as on date, they are
not out of race.
5. The petitioners were candidates in Assistant Professor (Botany) Examination
2022 and a single question has been raised in all these petitions. All the petitioners
have the educational qualification of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology from different Universities. The dispute is that whether it is an
allied subject of Botany and is relevant qualification for being appointed Assistant
Professor in Botany.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
3
6. The petitioners no. 1 to 11 in WP No.20091 of 2025 have attained the
qualification from Dr. Harisingh Gour Central University, Sagar, whereas
petitioner no.12 therein has attained the qualification from Banaras Hindu
University, Varanasi. Petitioner no.2 in WP No.20410 of 2025 has attained the
qualification from Banasthali Vidyapith, Rajasthan.
7. The question that arises for consideration is that whether the qualification of
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology is a relevant qualification in main or
allied subject for the purpose of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor
(Botany) in the Department of Higher Education in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
The Assistant Professors so selected would be required to teach the subject of
Botany in undergraduate and postgraduate courses in Government Colleges run by
the Department of Higher Education in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The
petitioners have attained the qualification of Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology in their postgraduate course, i.e. M.Sc. The petitioners have been
held disqualified in the examination assigning the reason that they have not
attained the postgraduate degree in main or allied subject and therefore they are not
eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in
Botany subject.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners have vehemently argued before this court
that the reason assigned by the respondents is illegal and arbitrary. It is contended
that prior to 2022, the posts were advertised by the MPPSC in the year 2017 and
though the advertisement in 2017 contained a similar provision by mentioning the
list of allied subjects of Botany wherein the subject of Applied Microbiology was
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
4
not there, but Microbiology was there. However, despite that provision, the
respondents have considered the candidates of Applied Microbiology in the
Recruitment Examination of 2017. The petitioners have referred to appointment of
one Shri Mukesh Kumar Bisen who has been appointed pursuant to the
advertisement of 2017 and he is M.Sc in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.
It is therefore contended that in the recruitment of 2017, though the subject of
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology was not mentioned, but it was not seen
as a dispute and even the candidates of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
were appointed. In the 2022 recruitment examination, the advertisement was issued
on 30/12/2022 and the advertisement contains the list of allied subjects of Botany
as per which Microbiology is mentioned as an allied subject and Biotechnology is
also mentioned as an allied subject. However, “Applied” Microbiology and
Biotechnology is not mentioned as a separate subject and only for this technical
reason, the candidature of the petitioners has been rejected by holding them to be
ineligible having obtained a degree of M.Sc. in “Applied” Microbiology and
Biotechnology.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also pointed out that
subsequently the respondents issued another recruitment notification in the year
2025 and in the 2025 recruitment notification, the subject of “Applied”
Microbiology and Biotechnology has been specially mentioned as allied subject of
Botany by issuing corrigendum dated 09/06/2026. Therefore, it is argued that in the
year 2017, the subject of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology was deemed a
relevant qualification and again in the 2025 recruitment test by issuing
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
5
corrigendum, this has been mentioned as a relevant qualification, but only in the
2022 recruitment, the said qualification has been disallowed by mentioning it not
to be a relevant qualification. Therefore, it is argued that the action of the
respondents is highly arbitrary and illegal and there is no reason why separate
classes are created between one set of candidates who applied in 2017 and 2025
recruitment, viz-a-viz the candidates like the petitioners who applied in 2022
recruitment. The respondents have created two classes without any nexus with the
objective to be achieved by this illegal and irrational classification.
10. It is further argued that it is the University which has the right to confer
degree in terms of Section 22 of University Grants Commission Act, 1946 and the
concerned Universities who have issued the degree, i.e. Dr. Harisingh Gour
University, Sagar, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, and Banasthali Vidyapith,
Rajasthan are treating the degrees of M.Sc. “Applied” Microbiology and
Biotechnology at par with degree of M.Sc. in Microbiology and these Universities
have certified that the post, curriculum and subjects in Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology are same as that of M.Sc. in Microbiology. The respondents have
erroneously classified the degree of M.Sc. “Applied” Microbiology and
Biotechnology and M.Sc. in Microbiology as two different courses for all purposes
including the purposes of recruitment of Assistant Professor.
11 . The Universities that have issued the degree have already clarified that the
degree of M.Sc. in Microbiology is equivalent to degree of M.Sc. in Applied
Microbiology and Biotechnology, and it was not open for the State Government to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
6
have disqualified the petitioners on the ground that they have a degree of M.Sc. in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.
12 . It is argued that merely insertion of the word “applied” in the nomenclature
of subject of M.Sc. degree has resulted in the disqualification of the petitioners,
which is a highly irrational and arbitrary action of the respondents which has no
sanctity in law. The course curriculum and course structure are the same, which has
been duly certified by the concerned University. Then there was no reason to have
created this irrational classification, that too only for the 2022 recruitment. For the
2017 and 2025 recruitment of the same post, same subject and for the same
Colleges, the decree has been treated to be relevant and requisite qualification.
13 . Per contra , the counsel for the respondent MPPSC has argued that MPPSC
is bound by the qualifications as prescribed by the State, for MPPSC is not the
appointing authority but is only a selecting authority. Whatever instructions are
issued by the State Government, MPPSC is bound by that and it has adhered to the
qualifications as prescribed by the Higher Education Department of the State of
Madhya Pradesh.
14. The counsel for the State on his part has vehemently argued that the question
of relevance and equivalence of qualifications is in the domain of academic experts
and it is not in the domain of the Courts, which are legal experts and not academic
experts. It has argued that the State Government had framed the committee for the
purpose and the letter of constitution of committee dated 20.12.2022 has been
brought on record as Annexure R-1, by contending that for the purpose of finding
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
7
out the allied subjects of various main subjects, the State Government had
constituted a committee and for the subject of Botany, one Dr. Ajay Kumar
Bhardwaj, Professor of Botany in Institute of Excellence in Higher Education,
Bhopal, which is run by the State Government, has been appointed as subject
expert to dwell upon the equivalence of qualifications and also to ascertain the
allied subjects of the main subjects. As a result of the recommendations of the
committee which comprised one subject expert of Botany, the State Government
has issued instructions to the MPPSC and in pursuance to the said instructions, the
MPPSC has inserted the necessary and desired qualifications in the recruitment
notice, which does not call for any interference from this Court. It has been argued
that the State Government being the employer has a right to prescribe the necessary
and desirable educational qualifications for appointment of employees in its
establishment. There is nothing illegal or irrational in the action of the respondents-
State in holding that the qualification of M.Sc. in Microbiology and Biotechnology
would be an allied subject and qualification of M.Sc. in “Applied” Microbiology
and Biotechnology would not be a relevant and allied to the subject.
15. The learned counsel further refers to the earlier judgment of a co-ordinate
Division Bench of this court passed in W.P. No. 30327 of 2022, decided on
21.03.2023 , to contend that ascertainment of allied subjects to the main subject is a
policy decision of the State Government, which is in the domain of subject experts,
and once the State Government has accepted the recommendation of the subject
expert and notified the allied subjects of the main subjects, then this academic
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
8
question cannot be made subject matter of challenge under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
16. He further refers to another Division Bench judgment in the case of
Niharika Shukla Vs. State of MP and others, W.P. no. 2722 of 2018, decided on
26.04.2018 , whereby a coordinate Division Bench had held that there is no reason
to question the wisdom of the State Government in grouping the allied subjects
with the relevant subjects and also that prescribing the qualifications is in the
domain of subject experts.
17 . This Court has heard the learned counsel for the rival parties at length and
perused documents placed on record.
18. The sole question that arises for consideration in these matters is whether the
qualification of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology has erroneously
been left out from being considered as relevant and allied course to the subject of
M.Sc. in Botany. Posts have been advertised by the State of Madhya Pradesh for
Assistant Professors in its Government Colleges to teach the subject of Botany at
undergraduate and postgraduate levels, and the State Government has refused to
recognize the subject of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology as an
allied qualification to M.Sc. in Botany.
19. It is not disputed that all the petitioners have attained the qualification of
M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology and they have been declared
ineligible, as having not obtained the necessary educational qualification in
relevant or allied subject.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
9
20. The list of allied subjects in Botany has been laid down in the recruitment
notice dated 30.12.2022 is as under:-
02. 1/1/0081/2022/Sec-1-
म य देश शासन उ च िश ा वभाग के आदेश मांक एफ
38(HED), 22.12.2022
दनांक ारा वन पितशा! वषय के संब $%धत सह वषय( के संबंध
म ) जानकार + िन ,नानुसार है :-
Allied Subject)
ं . वषय सह वषय (
वन पितशा!
1. Micro Biology)
सू 4म जीव व6ान (
1
Botany)
(
2. Bio Technology)
जैव ौ8ोिगक: (
3. Biology)
जीव व6ान (
4. Environmental Science)
पया ;वरण व6ान (
5. Bio Informatics Science)
जैव सूचना व6ान (
6. Genetics)
अनुवांिशक : (
7. Genetic Engineering)
अनुवांिशक यां >क: (
8. Life Science)
जीवन व6ान (
9. (Microbiology Industrial)
औ 8ो िगक सू 4म व6ान
10. Seed Technology)
बीज तकनीक : (
21. The said table has been inserted in advertisement of MPPSC in pursuance to
an order no 1/1/0081/2022/Sec-1-38(HED) dated 22.12.2022 issued by the Higher
Education Department of State of MP. It appears that the Department of Higher
Education issued the said order dated 22.12.2022 on the basis of which the list of
allied subjects was contained in the recruitment advertisement dated 30.12.2022.
This order of the Higher Education Department dated 22.12.2022 seems to have
been issued in pursuance to the order dated 20.12.2022 (Annexure R/1) issued by
the State Government whereby a committee was constituted to find out the allied
subjects of the main subjects. In this letter of constitution of committee dated
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
10
20.12.2022, one subject expert of botany, namely Dr. Ajay Kumar Bhardwaj was a
member. The meeting of the committee was fixed on 21.12.2022 at 12 noon in the
office of Commissioner of Higher Education, Bhopal and it appears that the order
in pursuance to recommendations of the committee was issued on the very next
date i.e. 22.12.2022.
22. No minutes of the committee have been brought to our notice and it is
evident that there was only one subject expert of Botany. In what manner the
deliberations were carried out, and whether the course structure of Applied
Microbiology and Biotechnology in Dr. H.S. Gour Central University, Sagar,
Banaras Hindu University and Banasthali Vidyapeeth was considered by the said
committee, has not been brought on record. Nothing has been brought on record
that whether the sole expert of Botany had considered the course structures of
various subjects, including the subject of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology while giving his recommendations. The deliberations seem to have
been completed in only one day. Infact, since there was only one subject expert of
Botany, he was expected to decide himself, rather than deliberate with any other
expert. What has been decided by him, has been kept under wraps by the State.
23 . A very relevant development has taken place in the meantime whereby this
order of the State Government order no. 1/1/0081/2022/Sec-1-38 (HED) dated
22.12.2022 has been amended by the State Government by issuing a corrigendum
notification dated 29.05.2026 bearing no. 1/1/0004/2026-Sec-1-38 (HED),
whereby three more allied subjects of botany have been recognized as under:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
11
1. Applied Microbiology
2. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.
3. Biochemistry.
24 . The aforesaid corrigendum advertisement has been issued by the MPPSC in
relation to Recruitment Examination of 2025 by giving effect to the amendment
notification of the State Government dated 29.05.2026, whereby the earlier
notification of allied subjects dated 22.12.2022 has been amended. The
corrigendum notification of MPPSC for Recruitment Test of 2025 is as under:-
म य देश लोक सेवा आयोग
रेसीड )सी े> - इंदौर
03/25-26/2025, 09.06.2026
शु Bप> प > मांक दनांक
2025
सहायक ायापक( के पद ( क : पूित हेतु ; व6ापन
सह वषय( के संबंध म ) जानकार +
01 ,
म य देश लोक सेवा आयोग ारा उ च िश ा वभाग म य देश शासन हेतु सहायक ायापक वन पितशा!
Botany) 25/2025 30.12.2025
( के पद ( क : पूित हेतु ; व6ापन मांक दनांक एवं सहायक ायापक ाणीशा!
Zoology) 26/2025 30.12.2025
( के पद ( क : पूित हेतु ; व6ापन मांक दनांक को आयोग क : वेबसाइट
www.mppsc.mp.gov.in
पर जार + कए गए ह E।
02 , 1/1/0004/2026-Sec-1-38(HED)::
म यदेश शासन उ च िश ा वभाग मं >ालय के संशािधत आदेश मांकः एफ
29-05-2026 1/1/0081/2022/1-38 (HED), 22.12.2022
दनांक रा Hय शासन एत I ारा आदेश मांक एफ दनांक के
1 ( 12 ( Allied Subjects)
सरल मांक वन पितशा! ) एवं ाणीशा! ) पर अं कत सह- वषय ( के Kप म ) िन ,नांकत
तािलका अनुसार वषय( को भी मा %य कया जाता है :-
मूल वषय सह वषय( क : सूची
वन पितशा!
1.
ए Lलाइड माइ ोबायोलॉजी
2.
ए Lलाइड माइ ोबायोलॉजी एवं बायोटेक् नोलॉजी
3.
जैव रसायन
1.
ाणीशा! जैव रसायन
03
व6ापन क : शेष शत O यथावत रह )गी।
SD/-
उप सिचव
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
12
25 . Therefore, now the situation that has arisen is that in the 2017 recruitment
notification, though the subject of “Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology” was
not specifically mentioned, but since the subject of M.Sc. in Microbiology and
M.Sc. in Biotechnology were mentioned as allied subjects, therefore the candidates
having qualification of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology were duly
appointed, and are in service.
26. In the year 2022 the State Government became wiser and its one-member
expert issued a list of allied subjects of Botany but skipped to insert the subject of
“Applied” Microbiology and Biotechnology in its said list. The State Government
thereafter issued an amendment notification on 29.05.2026 and inserted the
qualification of applied microbiological biology and biotechnology in the said list,
but applied its corrigendum with retrospective effect to the posts advertised in
2025, but not in 2022.
27. Now the situation that will arise is that a person who obtained the
qualification of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology in the year
2016, would be eligible in 2017 recruitment of Assistant Professor in Botany as
well as in 2025 recruitment of Assistant Professor in Botany but would be
ineligible in 2022 recruitment of Assistant Professor in Botany.
28 . The State Government issued the subsequent advertisement of 2025 on
30/12/2025. Later, it modified the list of allied subjects by amending its
notification dated 22/12/2022 on 29/5/2026, but treated this amendment to be with
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
13
retrospective effect by applying it to the advertisement dated 30/12/2025, but not to
2022 advertisement.
29 . Once the State Government has applied the amendment in order dated
22/12/2022 inserting subject of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
for the purpose of recruitment notice dated 30/12/2025 issued prior to the issuance
of amendment order, then it amounts to creation of class within class by not
applying the said amendment with retrospective effect for posts advertised in 2022.
30 . Even otherwise, there is no nexus of such classification with the objective to
be achieved. Once the qualification of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology was treated allied qualification in 2017 recruitment and is again is
being treated allied qualification in 2025 recruitment, then there is no reason that
why the said qualification was not treated allied qualification in 2022 recruitment.
Once there is no change in course curriculum and course structure in all this
intervening period. It is not so that in the intervening period, the said course has
underwent some changes. If that was the case, then the corrigendum would have
mentioned the degree of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology to be
acceptable as allied qualification only if it had been obtained ina particular
window of time. However, it is not so and the course has now been recognized as
allied qualification unconditionally.
31. Considering one qualification as allied qualification in one recruitment test,
then deleting it in the next recruitment test and then again inserting in the next
recruitment test, is something which is total non-application of mind on part of the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
14
State Government and a clear example of administrative and academic chaos in the
State Government.
32 . The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that though there can be class within
class and there can be discrimination between equals, but that discrimination can
only be made when there is some nexus of lawful objective to be achieved by such
discrimination and classification. Once there is no nexus of any objective to be
achieved by such classification, then such discrimination is violative of Article 14
of the Constitution of India which guarantees right to equality. There can be no
prescription of qualifications that brings about inequality and becomes a pretence
for inequality. The Constitution Bench in the case of State of J&K v. Triloki Nath
Khosa , (1974) 1 SCC 19 held as under:-
21. Our reason for saying this is to emphasize that the respondents ought to have
furnished particulars as to why, according to them, the classification between diploma-
holders and degree-holders is not based on a rational consideration having nexus with
the object sought to be achieved. In order to establish that the protection of the equal
opportunity clause has been denied to them, it is not enough for the respondents to say
that they have been treated differently from others, not even enough that a differential
treatment has been accorded to them in comparison with others similarly circumstanced.
Discrimination is the essence of classification and does violence to the constitutional
guarantee of equality only if it rests on an unreasonable basis. It was therefore incumbent
on the respondents to plead and show that the classification of Assistant Engineers into
those who hold diplomas and those who hold degrees is unreasonable and bears no
rational nexus with its purported object. Rather than do this, the respondents contented
themselves by propounding an abstract theory that educational qualifications are
germane at the stage of initial recruitment only. Omission to furnish the necessary
particulars was construed by this Court in two cases as indicating that the plea of
unlawful discrimination had no basis. [ (a) Katra Educational Society v. State of U. P.AIR
1966 SC 1307 : (1966) 3 SCR 328, 336-37 : (1967) 1 SCJ 5. (b) Probhudas Morarjee
Rajkotia v. Union of IndiaAIR 1966 SC 1044, 1047 : (1967) 1 SCJ 52.] Such an infirmity
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
15
in pleadings led this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd.
[AIR 1964 SC 1179 : (1964) 6 SCR 846 : (1964) 1 SCJ 555] to remand the matter to the
High Court in order to enable the petitioner therein to amend its petition.
. Even the Universities that have issued the degree of M.Sc. in Applied
33
Microbiology and Biotechnology or M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology have duly
verified that the course curriculum is same as that of M.Sc. Microbiology and these
degrees will be treated equivalent to M.Sc. Microbiology. Department of
Microbiology, Dr. H.S. Gaur University, Sagar has issued a certificate dated
29/10/2018 mentioning that the syllabus of M.Sc Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology and M.Sc Applied Microbiology at the said University is based on
UGC model curriculum of M.Sc. Microbiology and the students with these degrees
may be treated equivalent to M.Sc. Microbiology. The said University has issued
the following certificate:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
16
34. The other concerned University is Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi and
the said University, when it has advertised teaching posts vide Annexure P/9 issued
in July 2023, has clearly mentioned that the allied subjects of Botany are
Environment Science, Applied Microbiology, Microbiology, Biotechnology,
Bioinformatics.
35. The Department of Botany, Institute of Science, Banaras Hindu University,
Varanasi has issued a certificate Annexure P-10 dated 8/5/2025 whereby it has
been certified that the 2 years’ M.Sc. program in Applied Microbiology at
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
17
Department of Botany, BHU is equivalent to the syllabus of Microbiology in any
Institution.
36 . The third University involved is Banasthali Vidyapathi. The said University
has issued a certificate that the course curriculum of M.Sc. in Microbiology and
M.Sc. in “Applied” Microbiology and Biotechnology is the same having same
course topics and similar background. It has been certified that M.Sc. in Applied
Microbiology and Biotechnology at Banasthali Vidyapathi is similar to M.Sc.
Microbiology program offered at any other institution in India. The said certificate
is as under:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
18
37. It is clear that the Universities that have issued the degrees of M.Sc. in
“Applied” Microbiology have verified that their course is equal to M.Sc. in
Microbiology and there is no difference in course structure, course curriculum and
course duration.
38. The State Government has not brought on record any deliberation of the
one-member expert that how the question of equivalence of M.Sc. Microbiology
with M.Sc. Applied Microbiology was considered by the one member expert. The
University which has issued the degree is the best expert to decide that whether the
course structure framed by the University is equivalent to which course and
whether it is equivalent or not equivalent. All the relevant Universities have duly
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
19
certified that their courses in “Applied” Microbiology are equivalent to the course
in Microbiology and there is no difference in course structure, course curriculum
and course duration.
39. There is no reason why such certifications made by the Universities should
not have been accepted and indeed the State Government has now made amends
and issued a corrigendum of its order dated 22/12/2025 with retrospective effect,
but applied it only for 2025 recruitment and not for 2022 recruitment. This again
speaks of arbitrariness of the State in singling out 2022 recruitment for that
purpose.
40. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anand Yadav
v. State of U.P. , (2021) 12 SCC 390 , that the question of determining equivalence
arises only when the degrees are not identical. If the degrees are not identical, then
there is even no question of determining equivalence. It was held as under :-
37. We may note that, sometimes, without looking into the real ratio decidendi, a
judgment is followed as a precedent. This is what appears to have happened in
the impugned order [Sanjai Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P., 2018 SCC OnLine All
5940] . There are even some other judgments of the High Courts, which in turn
were then sought to be relied upon to canvas a proposition that there is a
widespread acceptance of MEd not being equivalent to MA (Education). That they
are two different degrees is obvious; this is even recognised by NCTE while
emphasising the subtle distinction between the two degrees as one being a
Master's degree but not a professional degree, while the other being a
professional degree. If the two degrees are identical, there is no question of
equivalence. The issue of equivalence only arises when there are two different
degrees and what is to be decided whether for certain purposes they can be
treated as equivalent. This is exactly what has happened as a result of the
respective expert committees set up by Respondents 2 & 5. The employer i.e.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
20
Respondent 2, had accepted the recommendation of the expert committee. The
UGC has also taken a stand that insofar as the two degrees are concerned, both
are postgraduate degrees, and the equivalence authority being Respondent 5 has
also opined on the basis of an expert committee, that the two can be treated as
equivalent for the post of Assistant Professor in Education. Thus, it is neither for
the contesting party i.e. Respondent 3, nor for this Court to sit as a court of
appeal over the decision of the experts. We may also note that Respondent 3 has
in fact been selected in the 2014 selection process as per the final list released on
22-5-2018.
41 . The right to confer degrees is vested on the University and is traceable to
Section 22 of the University Grants Commission Act 1956. If the University
concerned that has framed the course curriculum of a particular course has duly
certified the degree to be identical to another degree, then the State could not have
questioned the wisdom of the University. Nothing has been placed on record that
how the single expert in Botany has over-ruled the wisdom of the Universities.
Even now the State has made amends by issuing the amendment notification
applied with retrospective effect to 2025 advertisement, but not 2022
advertisement. The Kolhapur Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Dr.
Santaji Krishna Shinde Vs. Shivaji University, Kolhapur, WP No. 7120/2016,
(decided on 07.8.2026) has held as under :-
40. As stated above, the question of right to confer a degree can be
traced out to Section 22 of the UGC Act which is reproduced in
foregoing paragraphs, there is no right to question such degree
granted by another University. Any other interpretation would do
injustice to Section 22 of the UGC Act. There would be anarchy and
chaos in the educational fabric of this nation. Every University would
question the identical degrees conferred by another university.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37
21
42. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons, we find that the respondent-State has
erroneously held the qualification of M.Sc. in Applied Microbiology or M.Sc. in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology as not allied qualifications to the
qualification of M.Sc. in Botany. The same is held to be illegal and it is held that
the respondent has illegally deprived the petitioners of their right to be considered
for the post of Assistant Professor in Botany. Therefore, we set aside the impugned
communications dated 02.06.2025 & 06.05.2025 and hold that the petitioners have
the requisite eligibility qualification for the purpose of recruitment to the post of
Assistant Professor in Botany in 2022 recruitment advertisement issued by the
MPPSC.
43. We are informed that the petitioners have already appeared in recruitment
process in pursuance to the interim order passed on earlier occasion. Now their
results are required to be given effect. If any person lesser meritorious than the
petitioners in their relevant category has been given appointment, then appointment
orders be issued in favour of the petitioners. They would be entitled to count their
notional seniority for all purposes from the date of appointment of their
counterparts, except for financial benefits.
44 . With the aforesaid directions, these petitions are allowed and disposed of .
(ALPESH Y. KOGJE) (VIVEK JAIN)
CHIF JUSTICE JUDGE
MISHRA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 30-10-2026
16:33:37