Expression “equivalent qualifications” has a different connotation than the expression “relevant subject”.
Court was concerned with the interpretation of the expression “relevant subject”. But in that case the advertisement itself prescribed “the essential qualifications” under one head and “desirable specialisation” under another head. Therefore, this Court found that though the words “relevant subject” did not throw any light on the question as to what are the relevant subjects for the post of a Lecturer in any specified subject, the column dealing with “desirable qualifications” threw light upon what was relevant. Therefore, cases in which a clue is available in the advertisement itself may stand on a different footing than cases where there is no such clue.
Punjab University v. Narinder Kumar and Others, (1999) 9 SCC 8
