Past pursuit of higher education does not disqualify candidates absent possession or ongoing pursuit at application date.

The petitioner applied for recruitment to the posts of Sweeper, Sanitary Worker, Gardener, Waterman and Watchman in the Madras High Court Service pursuant to Recruitment Notification Nos. 72 and 73 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025.

The notification prescribed a minimum qualification of VIII Standard, subject to a maximum qualification of Higher Secondary (+2), and required candidates to undertake that they were not possessing or pursuing any higher qualification as on the date of application.

The petitioner appeared in and qualified the written examination but was yet to participate in the skill test and certificate verification.

His candidature was rejected on 06.07.2026 on the ground that he was overqualified, since he had joined a B.E. (Mechanical) course on 13.08.2014 and completed the four-year course on 10.04.2018, though he had not cleared several subjects and did not thereafter pursue the course.

He challenged the rejection under Article 226 of the Constitution, contending that he was neither possessing nor pursuing any higher qualification on 06.04.2025, the date of submission of his application.

Whether the petitioner was disqualified under Clause 4(B) of the Recruitment Notification merely because he had previously pursued a B.E. course, despite not possessing or pursuing that higher qualification on the date of application.

Whether the respondents’ rejection of the petitioner’s candidature on the ground of possessing a higher educational qualification was legally sustainable.

The Court applied Clause 4(B) of Recruitment Notification Nos. 72 and 73 of 2025, which prescribed a maximum educational qualification of Higher Secondary (+2) and required candidates to declare that they were not possessing or pursuing any higher qualification other than Higher Secondary or its equivalent as on the date of submission of the application.

The Court interpreted the clause as containing two distinct requirements: first, the candidate must not possess a qualification higher than Higher Secondary; and second, the candidate must not be pursuing such higher qualification on the application date.

The petition was adjudicated under the High Court’s power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The Court found that the petitioner possessed only the Higher Secondary qualification and had not acquired a B.E. qualification.

Although he had enrolled in and completed the duration of the B.E. course in 2018, he had not cleared several subjects and had abandoned the course thereafter.

Since the relevant date under Clause 4(B) was 06.04.2025, the material question was whether he was pursuing a higher qualification on that date, not whether he had ever previously enrolled in such a course.

The transfer certificate established that the petitioner had ceased pursuing the engineering course after 2018.

Accordingly, he did not fall within either disqualifying circumstance under Clause 4(B), and the respondents had wrongly treated his past pursuit of the course as a continuing disqualification.

It set aside the rejection order dated 06.07.2026 relating to Registration No. 25723051239, S. No. 2321, under the category “Possessing Higher Educational Qualification”.

The respondents were directed to permit the petitioner to participate in the further stages of the selection process in accordance with the recruitment notification and the applicable service rules.

The writ petition was allowed, the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, and there was no order as to costs.