Allahabad HC rejects BTech inclusion for junior analyst posts, upholds state's rules

Allahabad HC rejects BTech inclusion for junior analyst posts, upholds state’s rules

In short

  • The Allahabad High Court rejected a petition to include BTech graduates in Food Technology, Dairy Technology, Oil Technology, and Biotechnology for Junior Analyst (Food) recruitment.
  • The Lucknow Bench of Justices Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai ruled that the state government is competent to prescribe educational qualifications for its departmental cadre posts.
  • The court distinguished Junior Analyst (Food) from Food Analyst, noting that central rules for the latter do not mandate their inclusion for state-level junior posts.
  • The petition, filed by Pankaj Kumar and others, challenged service rules amended in 2020 and the recruitment advertisement for 417 posts.
  • The state government opposed the plea, asserting that the two posts are distinct and governed by different sets of rules.

The Allahabad High Court, through its Lucknow Bench, on Monday, rejected a plea to include BTech graduates in Food Technology, Dairy Technology, Oil Technology, and Biotechnology for recruitment to 417 Junior Analyst (Food) posts in Uttar Pradesh. A division bench of Justice Alok Mathur and Justice Amitabh Kumar Rai dismissed the petition, affirming the state government’s authority to set educational qualifications for posts within its departmental cadre.

The ruling impacts candidates aspiring for these state government positions, clarifying the distinction between Junior Analyst (Food) and Food Analyst roles. The court found no merit in the challenge to the recruitment rules, which were amended in 2020, and the subsequent recruitment advertisement.

Challenge to Recruitment Rules and Petitioners’ Arguments

The petition, filed by Pankaj Kumar and others, challenged the service rules amended in 2020 and the recruitment advertisement for the 417 Junior Analyst (Food) posts. The petitioners contended that the Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011, recognize bachelor’s degrees in several disciplines, including those held by the BTech graduates, as eligible qualifications for the post of Food Analyst. They argued for similar recognition for the Junior Analyst (Food) positions.

This argument aimed to broaden the pool of eligible candidates by aligning the state-level recruitment with qualifications recognized under central law for a related, but distinct, position. The petitioners sought to overturn the existing eligibility criteria, which they believed unduly restricted their opportunities for employment in the state’s food safety sector.

State Government’s Stance and Court’s Observations

The Uttar Pradesh government opposed the plea, asserting that Junior Analyst (Food) and Food Analyst are two distinct posts. Per the state government, the Junior Analyst (Food) position belongs to its departmental cadre, for which it is competent to prescribe educational qualifications. Appointments to the post of Food Analyst, on the flip side, are governed by central law and rules framed under it.

The Allahabad High Court concurred with the state government’s position. The bench observed that the central rules prescribing qualifications for Food Analysts did not require the state government to include every alternative qualification for recruitment to Junior Analyst (Food) posts. The court stated that “the state government was competent to prescribe educational qualifications for posts in its own departmental cadre.” This distinction was central to the court’s decision to dismiss the petition, finding no merit in the challenge to the recruitment rules.

Context of Previous Rulings by Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has a history of handling various recruitment and appointment-related challenges. In previous instances, the court dismissed a challenge to the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service (UPHJS) selection process, citing insufficient evidence of interview bias. It also quashed a single-judge bench order for a CBI probe into the process of appointment of 68,500 assistant basic teachers in Uttar Pradesh.

Also, the court rejected a plea to postpone the BEO preliminary examination, which was scheduled for August 16, 2020. This examination, initially advertised on December 13, 2019, for 309 posts, was to involve 5 lakh 15 thousand candidates across 18 districts. The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission had set August 16, 2020, as the new date after an initial postponement due to lockdown. These past decisions reflect a consistent judicial stance on upholding established recruitment processes and the state’s authority in setting rules, unless compelling legal or evidentiary grounds for intervention are presented.


Nishit Kumar
Written by

Nishit Kumar is a senior EdTech industry leader with over a decade of experience in building and scaling education platforms, shaping their product, content, and growth strategy. At FindMyCollege, Nishit oversees content and editorial strategy, guiding topic selection and content frameworks to ensure accuracy, relevance, and student-first value across the website.

View all posts →

Further reading

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *