Mismatch between declared and produced educational qualifications justifies rejection of candidature for recruitment to public posts.

The applicant applied for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP) under Centralized Employment Notice (CEN) No. 01/2018

In his application form, he declared his qualification as a "Diploma in Electronic and Computer Engineering"

He qualified all stages of the examination (CBT-I, CBT-II, and Aptitude Test) and was called for document verification

During verification, the applicant produced a "Diploma in Computer Science and Engineering," which differed from his initial declaration

Additionally, he later claimed to possess a "Diploma in Electronic Engineering" from a different university, which was neither mentioned in the original application nor produced during the initial verification process

Consequently, the respondents rejected his candidacy via a speaking order dated 14.08.2024, on the grounds of a document mismatch and the fact that a Computer Science diploma did not meet the prescribed eligibility criteria

1. Whether the applicant fulfilled the mandatory educational eligibility criteria for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot as prescribed in CEN No. 01/2018

2. Whether the mismatch between the qualification declared in the application and the documents produced during verification justifies the rejection of his candidature

The Tribunal applied the recruitment conditions specified in CEN No. 01/2018, which mandated a 3-year Diploma in Mechanical, Electrical, Electronics, or Automobile Engineering, or a combination thereof, but excluded Computer Science and Engineering

General Instructions of the advertisement (paragraphs 1.1, 1.3, and 1.11), which stipulate that admission to recruitment stages is purely provisional, and the Railway Recruitment Board (RRB) reserves the right to reject any candidate at any stage if they are found not to fulfill the requisite criteria, even after selection in examinations

The Court observed that the notification explicitly listed the trades eligible for the ALP post, and "Computer Science and Engineering" was not among them

Although the applicant claimed to have a Diploma in Electronic Engineering, the Court noted that this document was not mentioned in the application form nor presented during the verification stage, rendering it unacceptable at a later stage

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant gained entry to the examination by misrepresenting his qualification as "Electronics and Computer Engineering" in the form, whereas his actual verified certificate was for "Computer Science"

Applying the General Instructions, the Court held that the mere issuance of an e-call letter or the inclusion of the applicant’s name in a provisional panel does not confer a vested right to appointment if the underlying eligibility criteria are not met

The respondents' decision to reject his claim was upheld as legal and valid

The Original Application was dismissed for being devoid of merit, and any interim orders were discharged