Nagpur: Nagpur bench of Bombay high court on Friday ruled that possessing higher qualifications does not automatically make candidates eligible for specific nursing posts, holding that recruitment eligibility must strictly align with prescribed rules and not inferred equivalence.A division bench comprising Justices Mukulika Jawalkar and Nandesh Deshpande dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by nearly 30 candidates holding General Nursing and Midwifery (GNM) and BSc (Nursing) degrees who were excluded from selection for Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) posts under zilla parishads across Maharashtra. Court held that “even if qualification of candidates appears to be higher, they cannot claim eligibility unless rules recognise such qualification as equivalent”.Petitions filed through counsels SA Walde, SS Dhengale, Nitesh Bhutekar and AS Chakotkar challenged exclusion of candidates who had cleared the recruitment examination conducted in June 2024 and were initially declared qualified. However, during document verification, only candidates with ANM qualifications were retained, while those with higher qualifications were disqualified based on a govt communication of Sept 30, 2024.The court noted that the recruitment advertisement, issued for 308 posts of Health Worker (female), prescribed ANM qualification as per Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1967. While the nomenclature of the post created ambiguity, the bench clarified that “it is obvious that the prescribed qualification is of an ANM”, and zilla parishads are not empowered to appoint staff nurses.Rejecting the argument that higher qualifications subsume lower ones, the HC emphasised “the courts cannot rewrite service rules, determine equivalence of qualifications, or substitute their own assessment for that of the employer”. It further observed that eligibility criteria are a matter of policy and must be interpreted by state as the recruiting authority.The judges also underlined that participation in the recruitment process does not confer a right to appointment. “Only because the candidates appeared for the exam, and cleared the same, would not on its own vest them with any right,” they said, citing clauses in the advertisement allowing cancellation of candidature at any stage.Referring to recent Supreme Court rulings, the HC reiterated that judicial review in recruitment matters is limited and does not extend to questioning the state’s decision on qualification requirements unless proven arbitrary or unconstitutional.The judgment also highlighted ANM, GNM and BSc (Nursing) are distinct qualifications with different curricula, duration, and roles. State clarified that despite being higher qualifications, GNM and BSc (Nursing) holders are not trained for ANM-specific duties, particularly in primary health settings. Finding no merit in the petitions and noting that the advertisement itself was not challenged, the court dismissed all pleas, stating that “recruitment rules must be strictly construed, and the courts cannot dilute the eligibility criteria on the ground of perceived superiority of qualifications”.
