Supreme Court Upholds State's Authority to Impose Additional Eligibility Criteria for ANM Recruitment

Introduction

The case of Suman Devi And Others v. State Of Uttarakhand And Others (2021 INSC 212) revolves around the eligibility criteria for the recruitment of Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) in the State of Uttarakhand. The appellants, registered ANMs, contested the Uttarakhand High Court's ruling that deemed them ineligible for appointment to the cadre of Family Health Workers (FHW), ANMs, and Health Supervisors (HS) based on the government's recruitment rules. The core issue pertains to whether the state can impose additional educational qualifications beyond those prescribed by the Indian Nursing Council (INC).

Summary of the Judgment

The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment delivered by Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants. The court upheld the Uttarakhand High Court's decision that the state could lawfully require ANM candidates to have completed their Intermediate education with a Science stream. The Supreme Court found that the State of Uttarakhand, under its constitutional powers, is entitled to prescribe additional eligibility criteria for public service positions, provided they do not conflict with central regulations. Consequently, the appellants' claims of discrimination and violation of the right to equality were rejected.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references several precedents to substantiate its stance:

• Desh Bandhu Gupta & Co. v. Delhi Stock Exchange Assn. Ltd. (1979): Emphasized that eligibility conditions specified in recruitment advertisements must be adhered to.
• N.T. Devin Katti v. Karnataka Public Service Commission (1990): Held that recruitment criteria in advertisements bind the state during the selection process, regardless of subsequent rule changes.
• Ashok Kumar Sharma v. Chander Shekhar (1997): Established that eligibility of candidates is determined based on the criteria at the time of application submission.
• Sanjay Kumar Manjul v. UPSC (2006): Affirmed the authority of statutory bodies to frame conditions of service and qualifications for public posts.

Legal Reasoning

The Court's legal reasoning centered on the interpretation of the Uttarakhand Reorganisation Act, 2000, and the authority of the state under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The Court concluded that:

• The existing recruitment rules from the erstwhile Uttar Pradesh state continued to apply in Uttarakhand unless expressly modified.
• Section 87 of the Reorganisation Act allowed the state to adapt laws but did not nullify existing rules unless amended within two years.
• Absence of an adaptation order meant that all pre-existing laws and rules remained operative.
• The INC Act sets uniform standards for nursing education but does not prohibit states from imposing additional eligibility criteria for employment.
• The recruitment advertisement referenced prevailing state rules, which included the requirement of Intermediate education in the Science stream.
• There was no constitutional violation in the state's requirement as it fell within the state's authority to prescribe employment qualifications.

Impact

This judgment reinforces the principle that states retain the authority to establish additional eligibility criteria for public service positions, even if such criteria extend beyond central or statutory requirements. It underscores the importance of adhering to existing recruitment rules during the selection process and clarifies that legislative powers at the state level can complement central standards without conflicting with them. Future cases involving state recruitment rules can reference this judgment to justify the imposition of additional qualifications, provided they align with constitutional provisions.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Article 309 of the Constitution of India

Article 309 grants state governments the power to make rules for the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in the state. This authority allows states to define additional qualifications or criteria for positions within their jurisdiction.

Indian Nursing Council (INC) Act, 1947

The INC Act establishes standards for nursing education and recognizes qualifications necessary for enrollment in nursing registers. While it sets uniform educational standards, it does not restrict states from imposing their own specific employment criteria for nursing positions.

Reorganisation Act, 2000

The Reorganisation Act facilitated the creation of the new state of Uttarakhand from Uttar Pradesh. It provided provisions for adapting existing laws to fit the new state's framework. Unless laws are explicitly adapted or repealed, the existing rules of the former state continue to apply in the newly formed state.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's decision in Suman Devi And Others v. State Of Uttarakhand And Others affirms the state's prerogative to set additional eligibility criteria for public service appointments. By upholding the requirement of Intermediate education in the Science stream for ANM recruitment, the Court emphasized the importance of adhering to established recruitment rules and clarified the balance between central educational standards and state employment regulations. This judgment serves as a pivotal reference for future disputes regarding state-specific employment criteria, ensuring that while central standards provide a baseline, states retain the flexibility to define supplementary qualifications based on their administrative needs.